This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: RFC: Disallow protected data symbol with copy relocation?
On Fri, Jan 21, 2005 at 12:46:26AM -0500, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> "H. J. Lu" <hjl@lucon.org> writes:
>
> > > Why would the linker ever generate a copy relocation for a protected
> > > symbol? I don't see how that makes sense.
> > >
> >
> > For some psABIs, copy relocation is the normal way for main to access
> > data symbol on DSO.
> > ...
>
> Yes, I know. But clearly a copy relocation can not work. We should
> treat this case as though -z nocopyreloc was used for that specific
> symbol.
>
> Maybe that is what you meant by "reject protected data symbol with
> copy relocation." I am saying that the answer is not to reject the
> symbol, it is to not generate the copy relocation.
Avoid copy relocation leads to writable text section on ia32. I am not
sure that generate writable text section without -z nocopyreloc is a
good idea.
>
> There may be specific targets and/or cases where -z nocopyreloc does
> not work, for some hideous reason. Those specific targets and/or
> cases should generate a specific error. But this is not a general
> problem.
I don't think -z nocopyreloc works on x86_64.
H.J.