This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: Copy relocations against protected symbols
- From: Cary Coutant <ccoutant at google dot com>
- To: "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>
- Cc: Binutils <binutils at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2014 10:52:57 -0800
- Subject: Re: Copy relocations against protected symbols
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20141212130509 dot GB23430 at bubble dot grove dot modra dot org> <CAMe9rOqmG2Qbn56kbndm3mZq5c5-fjdJs2mQNXj4GvzRTk3Ahw at mail dot gmail dot com> <20141215010749 dot GA8347 at bubble dot grove dot modra dot org> <CAMe9rOrT3Luw1TDi+Tw4Y=MEhe57wgxxzPNz+tNpp+HT_itBCg at mail dot gmail dot com> <20141218044500 dot GA23483 at bubble dot grove dot modra dot org> <CAHACq4pQgXT11kmG+BLcEdWKsE2t-V__i7dkprk_FRH0SEOYhw at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAMe9rOo5xOQhp_n8vb_ybsG_Vv+cxNvu=+fkESmtNqEXsDOTgw at mail dot gmail dot com>
> Should we simply disallow creating DSO with protected data on targets
> with copy relocation?
I don't think so. Protected symbols are useful, and their presence
doesn't mean that a copy relocation will be needed. It would be pretty
heavy-handed, since most targets do support copy relocations.