This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: [Gcl-devel] Re: BFD relocations
- From: Alan Modra <amodra at bigpond dot net dot au>
- To: Camm Maguire <camm at enhanced dot com>
- Cc: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at mvista dot com>, Paul Koning <pkoning at equallogic dot com>, binutils at sources dot redhat dot com, gcl-devel at gnu dot org
- Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2002 16:36:39 +0930
- Subject: Re: [Gcl-devel] Re: BFD relocations
- References: <20020604223014.GA7579@nevyn.them.org> <547kldpbu0.fsf@intech19.enhanced.com> <20020605230537.GA4336@nevyn.them.org> <54g001xnnf.fsf@intech19.enhanced.com> <20020606010956.GA7291@nevyn.them.org> <547klbixuk.fsf@intech19.enhanced.com> <15616.47945.929255.781190@pkoning.dev.equallogic.com> <54elfeu5ih.fsf@intech19.enhanced.com> <20020610230608.GA15617@nevyn.them.org> <54ofctahrb.fsf@intech19.enhanced.com>
On Sat, Jul 27, 2002 at 12:59:04AM -0400, Camm Maguire wrote:
> Greetings!
>
> When called to retrieve non-relocatable output (i.e. with the
> output_bfd parameter set to 0), bfd_get_relocated_section_contents
> works on the following platforms:
>
> elf: i386 ppc s390 m68k arm sparc
>
> The following platforms fail:
>
> elf: mips alpha ia64 hppa
> coff: i386
>
> 1) Is it intended to support this routine on all platforms eventually?
What itch will it scratch?
> 2) Are patches enabling this function likely to be accepted rather
> easily, or are they likely to break other currently used
> routines?
Implementing this function likely won't break anything.
> 3) Are there recommended guidelines for such patches? I.e. relatively
> safe places for modifications?
You'll likely need to implement missing special_function entries for
reloc howto structures. It may work out easier in some cases to
implement a new get_relocated_section_contents function rather than
trying to use bfd_generic_get_relocated_section_contents.
--
Alan Modra
IBM OzLabs - Linux Technology Centre