This is the mail archive of the binutils@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the binutils project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: [davidm@napali.hpl.hp.com: Re: [PATCH] i386 vsyscall DSO implementation]

From: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
To: Jim Wilson <wilson at tuliptree dot org>
Cc: "H. J. Lu" <hjl at lucon dot org>, binutils at sources dot redhat dot com
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2003 15:09:15 +0200
Subject: Re: [davidm@napali.hpl.hp.com: Re: [PATCH] i386 vsyscall DSO implementation]
References: <20030614032158.GA24639@lucon.org> <3EEBA6C7.6010206@tuliptree.org> <20030615041902.GA12909@lucon.org> <1055652072.1019.98.camel@leaf.tuliptree.org> <20030615125757.GF24872@sunsite.ms.mff.cuni.cz>
Reply-to: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>

On Sun, Jun 15, 2003 at 02:57:58PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> You certainly cannot change the distance between 2 loadable segments.
> If you did, it would e.g. break all @gprel relocations in one of the
> segments, so I don't see why segrel shouldn't be supported accross segments.

There are many other examples. If say RX segment contains PCREL* relocations
against local symbols in RW segment, you don't end up with any dynamic
relocation either.

	Jakub

References:
- [davidm@napali.hpl.hp.com: Re: [PATCH] i386 vsyscall DSOimplementation]
  - From: H. J. Lu
- Re: [davidm@napali.hpl.hp.com: Re: [PATCH] i386 vsyscall DSOimplementation]
  - From: Jim Wilson
- Re: [davidm@napali.hpl.hp.com: Re: [PATCH] i386 vsyscall DSOimplementation]
  - From: H. J. Lu
- Re: [davidm@napali.hpl.hp.com: Re: [PATCH] i386 vsyscall DSOimplementation]
  - From: Jim Wilson
- Re: [davidm@napali.hpl.hp.com: Re: [PATCH] i386 vsyscall DSO implementation]
  - From: Jakub Jelinek

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]