Re: bug in .eh_frame_hdr processing

[Andrew Haley <aph at redhat dot com>]

Alan Modra writes:
 > On Sun, Feb 23, 2003 at 11:01:01AM +0000, Andrew Haley wrote:
 > > Richard Henderson writes:
 > >  > On Sat, Feb 22, 2003 at 08:11:54PM +0000, Andrew Haley wrote:
 > >  > > Alternatively, perhaps we shouldn't do this optimization at all when
 > >  > > generating relocateable output, but instead postpone it until final
 > >  > > link.
 > >  > 
 > >  > I'd prefer this.
 > > 
 > > Me too.  It's simpler, and safer.
 > 
 > Yes, given that this is at least the second ld -r problem found in the
 > eh_frame editing code, I think I made a mistake in enabling the
 > optimization for ld -r.  It wouldn't hurt to commit your fix though.

Jakub sent me this patch in email:

2003-02-27   Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
             Andrew Haley  <aph at redhat dot com>

	* elflink.h (elf_bfd_discard_info): Don't process eh frames if
	output is relocateable.

Index: elflink.h
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/bfd/elflink.h,v
retrieving revision 1.206
diff -c -2 -p -r1.206 elflink.h
*** elflink.h   17 Feb 2003 18:24:40 -0000      1.206
--- elflink.h   27 Feb 2003 17:58:30 -0000
*************** elf_bfd_discard_info (output_bfd, info)
*** 8329,8335 ****
  
        eh = bfd_get_section_by_name (abfd, ".eh_frame");
!       if (eh != NULL
!         && (eh->_raw_size == 0
!             || bfd_is_abs_section (eh->output_section)))
        eh = NULL;
  
--- 8329,8336 ----
  
        eh = bfd_get_section_by_name (abfd, ".eh_frame");
!       if (info->relocateable
!         || (eh != NULL
!             && (eh->_raw_size == 0
!                 || bfd_is_abs_section (eh->output_section))))
        eh = NULL;
  
*************** elf_bfd_discard_info (output_bfd, info)
*** 8432,8435 ****
--- 8433,8437 ----
  
    if (info->eh_frame_hdr
+       && !info->relocateable
        && _bfd_elf_discard_section_eh_frame_hdr (output_bfd, info))
      ret = TRUE;