This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the glibc 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: [PATCH] Implement x86 SIZE32/SIZE64 relocations

On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 09:46:37AM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 9:25 AM, Jakub Jelinek <> wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 09:10:28AM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
> >> On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 8:53 AM, Jakub Jelinek <> wrote:
> >> > On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 08:32:54PM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
> >> >> I checked x86 size relocation support into binutils and
> >> >> pushed it to master branch in glibc.
> >> >
> >> > Please revert it, this should have never been a dynamic relocation.
> >> >
> >>
> >> That is not true.  Please see binutils size relocation linker tests.
> >> 2 tests scan for run-time size relocation.
> >
> > You've added a feature that is not really useful for asan, without
> > discussing it first.  So we just end up with dead code in both glibc and
> > gcc.
> First, they aren't dead code. Secondly,  they are specified in the
> psABI:

They were added for a different OS.  If they are in psABI, they can be kept
in elf.h, but there is no point to slow down the dynamic linker to handle
something that won't be ever used.

I'm sorry I haven't responded immediately to your changes (but it wasn't
obvious that you are actually intending to submit this to binutils/glibc
without actually first checking whether what you've implement can be useful
for something), but it was a new feature, something not appropriate for
GCC 4.8 at that point and thus work on GCC 4.8 stabilization took


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