This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: Why deos ELF/PPC care R_PPC_NONE?
- To: "H . J . Lu" <hjl at lucon dot org>
- Subject: Re: Why deos ELF/PPC care R_PPC_NONE?
- From: Alan Modra <amodra at bigpond dot net dot au>
- Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2001 11:12:06 +0930
- Cc: Franz Sirl <Franz dot Sirl-kernel at lauterbach dot com>, binutils at sourceware dot cygnus dot com
- References: <20011016201334.A31989@lucon.org> <5.1.0.14.2.20011018170201.054d1008@mail.lauterbach.com> <20011018125216.A2750@lucon.org> <20011018132849.A3482@lucon.org>
On Thu, Oct 18, 2001 at 01:28:49PM -0700, H . J . Lu wrote:
>
> * elf32-i370.c (i370_elf_relocate_section): Ignore R_XXX_NONE.
> * elf32-ppc.c (ppc_elf_relocate_section): Likewise.
I'd call this an "obvious fix", except for the fact that elf32_ppc.c
specifically mentions R_PPC_NONE in the group of relocations "that
always need to be propagated if this is a shared object". Go ahead
and apply it anyway; The only real use I can think of for a _NONE
reloc is in tying sections together during --gc-sections, and I don't
think ppc binutils does anything like that.
Alan