This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: ppc64 without dot syms and linux kernel interaction
- From: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
- To: binutils at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 09:54:29 +0200
- Subject: Re: ppc64 without dot syms and linux kernel interaction
- References: <20040817200439.GP30497@sunsite.ms.mff.cuni.cz> <20040818100149.GL22977@bubble.modra.org>
- Reply-to: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
On Wed, Aug 18, 2004 at 07:31:49PM +0930, Alan Modra wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 17, 2004 at 10:04:39PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 17, 2004 at 09:50:14PM +0200, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > > it breaks the kernel too...
> [snip]
> > .llong .sys_foobar
> [snip]
>
> * elf64-ppc.c (func_desc_adjust): Give undefined dot-symbols a value
> if we can look up their function descriptor in a regular file.
Thanks a lot.
BTW, unrelated to this,
what do you think should be done in the new ABI with garbage collection of
.opd entries (.opd entries for functions not exported from a binary
or shared library and whose address is never taken don't need to be persent)?
In the old ABI it would be enough just to kill the .opd entries,
but in the new ABI if the .opd entry is removed, suddenly debugger
(and objdump -d) will not know anything about the function.
Should such operation move the non-dot symbol to the actual function
body in that case (in addition to removing the unneeded .opd entry)?
Jakub