This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sourceware.org
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: RFC: Adding an extra field to Elf_Internal_Sym
Alan Modra <amodra@gmail.com> writes:
> On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 11:44:27AM +0000, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>> One option is to add an internal-only st_type. There is one free:
>> STT_LOPROC + 1. But we'd then be scuppered if a real ARM-specific
>> st_type was defined in future.
>
> You also have STT_LOOS+1 and STT_LOOS+2. That gives you three to
> choose from, and since this is internal only you can change between
> those values at will. I think that's the way I'd go.
Hmm, OK. If we're prepared to use the OS range in that way,
maybe we should use it from the outset, as a statement of intent.
Would it be OK to start with STT_LOOS+2, say as:
#define STT_GNU_INTERNAL 12
and then:
#define STT_GNU_ARM_TIFUNC STT_GNU_INTERNAL
?
ARM maintainers, do you have any preference between the two approaches
(symbol type vs. on-the-side information)? For reference, the original
message was:
http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2010-11/msg00475.html
Richard