This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: Help with debugging coff .cset bug?
- From: "Jason Sullivan" <jasonsul at us dot ibm dot com>
- To: Alan Modra <amodra at bigpond dot net dot au>
- Cc: binutils at sources dot redhat dot com, binutils-owner at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2002 10:00:59 -0400
- Subject: Re: Help with debugging coff .cset bug?
Yep, I expect all the sections to start at address 0 (at least before I run
it through a linker).
--
Jason M. Sullivan
PowerPC Embbedded Processor Solutions
IBM Microelectronics
jasonsul@us.ibm.com (919.543.5650)
Alan Modra
<amodra@bigpond.net.au To: Jason Sullivan/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS
> cc: binutils@sources.redhat.com
Sent by: Subject: Re: Help with debugging coff .cset bug?
binutils-owner@sources
.redhat.com
07/19/02 06:09 AM
On Wed, Jul 17, 2002 at 06:18:28PM -0400, Jason Sullivan wrote:
> I'm making amusing attempts to debug a problem with .csect addressing in
> the gas assembler. I've got it configured on AIX
> (--host=rs6000-ibm-aix4.3.3.0 --target=powerpc-ibm-aix) and Linux
> (--host=i686-pc-linux-gnu --target=powerpc-ibm-aix), and I see the
problem
> in both places. When I look at the .lst file and dump the object file,
the
> first and second .csects begin at the right address (0, since I haven't
> linked it), but the third .csect begins where the first one left off (so
if
> the last address in the first section is 0x18, the first address of the
> third section will be 0x1c).
Hi Jason,
You don't say what you consider the correct behaviour, at least not
explicitly. I'll assume that you expect the third csect to start from
zero. Is that so? From what I've read about csects they appear to
behave more or less like ELF sections, so that would be reasonable.
--
Alan Modra
IBM OzLabs - Linux Technology Centre