This is the mail archive of the binutils@sourceware.cygnus.com 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]

Re: Symbol visibility revised

To: "H . J . Lu" <hjl at valinux dot com>
Subject: Re: Symbol visibility revised
From: Richard Henderson <rth at cygnus dot com>
Date: Mon, 1 May 2000 23:01:06 -0700
Cc: "Martin v. Loewis" <martin at loewis dot home dot cs dot tu-berlin dot de>, binutils at sourceware dot cygnus dot com, chip at valinux dot com, drepper at cygnus dot com
References: <200005011738.TAA10412@loewis.home.cs.tu-berlin.de> <20000501112816.A4346@valinux.com> <200005011950.VAA11097@loewis.home.cs.tu-berlin.de> <20000501133908.A6606@valinux.com>

On Mon, May 01, 2000 at 01:39:08PM -0700, H . J . Lu wrote:
> You are right. Here is the modified patch. We should remove PLT
> only for hidden and internal symbols.

Why?  What has the PLT in a dso got to do with the function pointer?

The only time we resolve to a PLT entry (x86, m68k, sparc) is when
the main application does not define a function it calls.  On other
systems (alpha, ia64) taking the address of a function has zilch
to do with PLTs.

r~

References:
- Symbol visibility revised
  - From: Martin v. Loewis
- Re: Symbol visibility revised
  - From: H . J . Lu
- Re: Symbol visibility revised
  - From: Martin v. Loewis
- Re: Symbol visibility revised
  - From: H . J . Lu

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