This is the mail archive of the 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: Preventing preemption of 'protected' symbols in GNU ld 2.26

On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 1:52 AM, Jeff Law <> wrote:
> On 03/30/2016 06:40 PM, Cary Coutant wrote:
>>> It would help me immensely on the GCC side if things if you and Alan
>>> could
>>> easily summarize correct behavior and the impact if we were to just
>>> revert
>>> HJ's change.  A testcase would be amazingly helpful too.
>> It looks like it's not just the one change. There's this patch:
>> which took the idea that protected can still be pre-empted by a COPY
>> relocation and extended it to three more targets that use COPY
>> relocations.
>> I wonder how many other patches have been based on the same
>> misunderstanding?
> I don't think it was many -- I certainly recall the arm/aarch64 variant.
> There may have been one other varasm.c change in this space or I might be
> conflating it with the arm/aarch64 change.  Tracking those down is naturally
> part of this work.

The glibc tests elf/tst-protected1{a,b}.c also need to be reviewed at
the same time.  IIUC, the reason the patch above went in were to fix
failures on arm / aarch64 with those tests. I haven't yet worked out
whether all this is the same issue.

CC'ing Szabolcs.


> jeff

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