binutils 2.19.92 linker broke with --as-needed flag
David Daney
ddaney.cavm@gmail.com
Fri Mar 29 00:49:00 GMT 2013
On 03/28/2013 04:21 PM, Vincent Wen wrote:
> Eric,
>
> Thanks a lot for clarification!
>
> Alan,
>
> So I am testing the following patch per our discussion. Please let me
> know if anything missing.
>
It may be worth having Richard Sandiford look at this. He has been
doing most of the MIPS patch reviews of late...
David Daney
> Thanks,
>
> Vincent
>
> --- a/bfd/elfxx-mips.c 2013-02-10 16:50:56.000000000 -0800
> +++ b/bfd/elfxx-mips.c 2013-02-10 17:14:06.000000000 -0800
> @@ -4681,12 +4681,9 @@
> h->non_elf = 0;
> h->def_regular = 1;
> h->type = STT_OBJECT;
> + h->other = STV_HIDDEN;
> elf_hash_table (info)->hgot = h;
>
> - if (info->shared
> - && ! bfd_elf_link_record_dynamic_symbol (info, h))
> - return FALSE;
> -
> amt = sizeof (struct mips_got_info);
> g = bfd_alloc (abfd, amt);
> if (g == NULL)
>
> On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 3:02 PM, Eric Christopher <echristo@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 7:36 PM, Alan Modra <amodra@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 06:54:39PM -0700, Vincent Wen wrote:
>>>> Alan,
>>>>
>>>> Who is the MIPS maintainer?
>>>
>>> Theoretically Eric Christopher, but binutils/MAINTAINERS lists an
>>> old email address and it's been a while since we've seen him around
>>> here. Eric, can you comment on the code below?
>>>
>>
>> Yeah, it's been a while. Sorry about that. I'll update everything at some point
>> though I'm no longer doing anything with MIPS (or mn10300) so while I can
>> pitch in on occasion I could also move myself to write-after-approval
>> if you'd like.
>>
>>>> On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 5:02 PM, Alan Modra <amodra@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 10:24:51AM -0700, Vincent Wen wrote:
>>>>>> Alan,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'd like to know whether the patch for this issue is accepted or not?
>>>>>
>>>>> That really is up to one of the MIPS maintainers. As I said in
>>>>> http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2013-02/msg00159.html the MIPS backend
>>>>> wants _GLOBAL_OFFSET_TABLE_ dynamic for some reason.
>>>>>
>>>>> bh = NULL;
>>>>> if (! (_bfd_generic_link_add_one_symbol
>>>>> (info, abfd, "_GLOBAL_OFFSET_TABLE_", BSF_GLOBAL, s,
>>>>> 0, NULL, FALSE, get_elf_backend_data (abfd)->collect, &bh)))
>>>>> return FALSE;
>>>>>
>>>>> h = (struct elf_link_hash_entry *) bh;
>>>>> h->non_elf = 0;
>>>>> h->def_regular = 1;
>>>>> h->type = STT_OBJECT;
>>>>> elf_hash_table (info)->hgot = h;
>>>>>
>>>>> if (info->shared
>>>>> && ! bfd_elf_link_record_dynamic_symbol (info, h))
>>>>> return FALSE;
>>>>>
>>>>> I think that is just plain wrong, but I don't know the history of this
>>>>> code.
>>
>> It's been that way since the original revision and that's a long long time
>> ago. :) I think I noticed it at one point and thought it odd, but I'm not sure
>> what it was actually for... some oddity on SGI machines that depended
>> upon a dynamic _GLOBAL_OFFSET_TABLE_ that only appeared if there
>> were entries? If there's anything weird the easiest assumption is "SGI
>> was weird".
>>
>> Sorry I couldn't be more help.
>>
>> -eric
>
>
More information about the Binutils
mailing list