This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: Missing variable 'pe_data_import_dll'
- To: Charles Wilson <cwilson at ece dot gatech dot edu>
- Subject: Re: Missing variable 'pe_data_import_dll'
- From: Charles Wilson <cwilson at ece dot gatech dot edu>
- Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2001 02:47:50 -0400
- CC: binutils at sources dot redhat dot com,Paul Sokolovsky <paul dot sokolovsky at technologist dot com>,Robert Collins <robert dot collins at itdomain dot com dot au>
- References: <3B730DBE.4080906@ece.gatech.edu>
Charles Wilson wrote:
> > Hi Paul,
> >
> > Your recent patch to ld/pe-dll.c:
> >
> > 2001-08-02 Paul Sokolovsky <paul.sokolovsky@technologist.com>
> >
>
>
> This patch originated with Paul; however, I and others modified it
> significantly before it was accepted into binutils CVS.
>
>
> >
> > created a reference to an external variable called: 'pe_data_import_dll'
> > in the function pe_create_import_fixup().
>
>
> Ah. but this particular variable (which started life as
> "data_import_dll") originated in a part of the code which was carried
> unchanged from Paul's original. So, it is correct that questions about
> this should be directed to Paul...but I'll elaborate below.
>
>
> > Unfortunately this new variable does not appear to be defined anywhere!
> > (At least it was not defined when I tried to build the arm-epoc-pe
> > target today).
>
>
> It is defined in emultempl/pe.em. From my personal "auto-import STATUS"
> list:
>
> > 1. make pe_data_import_dll static? No, used in both pe.em and
> > pe-dll.c. But why? Is this really necessary -- it sure is ugly. Can
> > we fix it?
>
This is an attempt to improve the situation w.r.t. this shared data
between pe.em and pe-dll.c. It works as expected on cygwin, but can
somebody on a non-DLL, pei386 platform (like arm-epoc-pe) give this a shot?
--Chuck
2001-09-21 Charles Wilson <cwilson@ece.gatech.edu>
* emultempl/pe.em(pe_data_import_dll): Make static.
(pe_get_data_import_dll_name): New accessor function.
* pe-dll.c(pe_create_import_fixup): call
pe_get_data_import_dll_name() from pe.em, instead of
directly accessing pe_data_import_dll variable from pe.em.
Index: ld/pe-dll.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/ld/pe-dll.c,v
retrieving revision 1.30
diff -u -r1.30 old/ld/pe-dll.c new/ld/pe-dll.c
--- old/ld/pe-dll.c 2001/09/19 05:33:33 1.30
+++ new/ld/pe-dll.c 2001/09/21 06:09:49
@@ -123,6 +123,9 @@
static void
add_bfd_to_link PARAMS ((bfd *, const char *, struct bfd_link_info *));
+extern char *
+pe_get_data_import_dll_name PARAMS(( )); /* Defined in emultempl/pe.em. */
+
/* For emultempl/pe.em. */
def_file * pe_def_file = 0;
@@ -2065,10 +2068,9 @@
}
{
- extern char * pe_data_import_dll; /* Defined in emultempl/pe.em. */
-
- bfd *b = make_import_fixup_entry (name, fixup_name, pe_data_import_dll,
- output_bfd);
+ bfd *b = make_import_fixup_entry (name, fixup_name,
+ pe_get_data_import_dll_name(),
+ output_bfd);
add_bfd_to_link (b, b->filename, &link_info);
}
}
Index: ld/emultempl/pe.em
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/ld/emultempl/pe.em,v
retrieving revision 1.52
diff -u -r1.52 old/ld/emultempl/pe.em new/ld/emultempl/pe.em
--- old/ld/emultempl/pe.em 2001/09/18 10:10:21 1.52
+++ new/ld/emultempl/pe.em 2001/09/21 06:09:51
@@ -153,6 +153,7 @@
static char *pe_implib_filename = NULL;
static int pe_enable_auto_image_base = 0;
static char *pe_dll_search_prefix = NULL;
+static char *pe_data_import_dll = NULL;
#endif
extern const char *output_filename;
@@ -879,7 +880,32 @@
return 1;
}
-char *pe_data_import_dll;
+/* Previously, pe-dll.c directly accessed pe_data_import_dll,
+ * which was only defined if DLL_SUPPORT. This cause a build
+ * failure on certain targets. At least this function will
+ * exist regardless of whether DLL_SUPPORT is defined or not.
+ *
+ * However, it's still a kludge. pe-dll.c shouldn't directly
+ * call any functions other than the gld_${EMULATION_NAME}_*
+ * Nick suggests the following method:
+ * I still feel however, that there ought to be a better
+ * way to solve this problem. My suggestion is that the
+ * definition of DLL_SUPPORT ought to be set in ld/configure.tgt
+ * rather than ld/emultemp/pe.em and then tested in ld/pe-dll.c
+ * before it uses variables that are only defined in pe.em.
+ * However, I don't understand this. ld/configure.tgt sets SHELL
+ * variables, not #define variables. You'd need #define variables
+ * to #ifdef out the offending sections of code from pe-dll.c
+ */
+char *
+pe_get_data_import_dll_name ()
+{
+#ifdef DLL_SUPPORT
+ return pe_data_import_dll;
+#else
+ return "unknown";
+#endif
+}
static void
pe_find_data_imports ()