This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: [PATCH] Indicate dependency on personality routines for ARM EHABI
- From: Paul Brook <paul at codesourcery dot com>
- To: binutils at sources dot redhat dot com
- Cc: Ian Lance Taylor <ian at airs dot com>,Julian Brown <julian at codesourcery dot com>
- Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2005 16:46:41 +0000
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Indicate dependency on personality routines for ARM EHABI
- Organization: CodeSourcery
- References: <420A38B6.3010609@codesourcery.com> <m3hdkllmme.fsf@gossamer.airs.com>
On Wednesday 09 February 2005 16:32, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> More generally, I think it's kind of dubious to use a zero reloc to
> mean anything at all. And why do you need a relocation entry? Why is
> it not sufficient to enter the symbol in the symbol table as an
> undefined symbol?
Isn't a linker allowed to discard symbols if nothing uses them?
The symbols referenced by the relocation are only ever called via a weak
reference from the unwinding library. The use of the routine is implicitly
encoded in the unwinding tables.
> Is the use of a zero reloc mandated by the ARM ABI?
Yes. The ABI defines and requires the use of a zero reloc (R_ARM_NONE).
Paul