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] | |
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] |