This is the mail archive of the binutils@sourceware.org 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]

BFD, GAS, LD internal manuals (was: Relocations against STN_UNDEF)


Hello!

On 2010-09-24 09:16, Alan Modra wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 09:54:25AM +0200, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
>> On 2010-09-24 00:12, Alan Modra wrote:
>> > ARM fails because the arm backend specifically checks for undefined
>> > local symbols.  I'd say the arm backend check needs fixing (or
>> > removing) rather than changing the common elflink code.
>> 
>> Surely enough we could just change the ARM backend, but I'm not yet
>> really convinced that this is the most appropriate approach: if we agree
>> that BFD internally shall register STN_UNDEF with bfd_abs_section
>> instead of bfd_und_section (as demonstrated in other parts of the code
>> that I quoted),
>
> What is done elsewhere to make ELF relocs fit into the BFD framework
> isn't particularly relevant to the ELF linker.

>> >> I wonder why we need this code duplicated in (at least) two places; why
>> >> do objdump and ld use different code paths for reading in relocations?
>> >
>> > Efficiency.
>> 
>> Uhm, okay...
>
> To expand a little, [...]

Thanks!, that's exactly the information I needed.  It does make sense
now.

Oh, I *just now* found exactly this information in bfd/doc/bfdint.texi --
my bad that I missed it before.


Is it intentional that the BFD, GAS, LD internal manuals don't have
Makefile rules for easily building them?


Regards,
 Thomas

Attachment: pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature


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