This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sourceware.org
mailing list for the binutils project.
PING: Maintainers of arm-epoc-pe, mcore-unknown-pe, sh-unknown-pe
- From: Dave Korn <dave dot korn dot cygwin at googlemail dot com>
- To: Kaz Kojima <kkojima at rr dot iij4u dot or dot jp>
- Cc: dave dot korn dot cygwin at googlemail dot com, binutils at sourceware dot org
- Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 00:15:00 +0000
- Subject: PING: Maintainers of arm-epoc-pe, mcore-unknown-pe, sh-unknown-pe
- References: <4999E47C.4010400@gmail.com> <20090217.081814.167778414.kkojima@rr.iij4u.or.jp>
Kaz Kojima wrote:
> Dave Korn wrote:
>> Hi! Does your target support "ld -r"?
>
> For SH ELF, I think so.
Ah, sorry; I meant specifically for the PE object format variants. Subject
line adjusted.
The reason is that all these targets use the same BFD backend vector for
relocatable and non-relocatable links, and this causes some confusion in the
generated output files. Fully explained at:
http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2009-02/msg00174.html
So, when I link a .o file using -r with sh-unknown-pe ld, I see all these
warnings:
/gnu/binutils/obj776-sh-unknown-pe/ld $ /gnu/binutils/obj776-sh-unknown-pe/ld/.
./gas/as-new -o tmpdir/dump0.o /gnu/binutils/src/ld/testsuite/ld-pe/longsecn.s
/gnu/binutils/obj776-sh-unknown-pe/ld $ ./ld-new
-L/gnu/binutils/src/ld/testsuite/ld-pe -r -o tmpdir/dump tmpdir/dump0.o
DJ: zero vma section reloc detected: `.text' #0 f=275
DJ: zero vma section reloc detected: `.data' #1 f=291
DJ: zero vma section reloc detected: `.text.very.long.section.name' #4 f=315
DJ: zero vma section reloc detected: `.data$1' #5 f=291
DJ: zero vma section reloc detected: `.rodata$1' #6 f=291
DJ: zero vma section reloc detected: `.data$123' #7 f=291
DJ: zero vma section reloc detected: `.rodata$123' #8 f=291
DJ: zero vma section reloc detected: `.data$123456789' #9 f=291
DJ: zero vma section reloc detected: `.rodata$123456789' #10 f=291
DJ: zero vma section reloc detected: `.data.very.long.section' #11 f=291
DJ: zero vma section reloc detected: `.rodata.very.long.section' #12 f=291
DJ: zero vma section reloc detected: `.data.very.long.section$1' #13 f=291
DJ: zero vma section reloc detected: `.rodata.very.long.section$1' #14 f=291
DJ: zero vma section reloc detected: `.data.very.long.section$1234' #15 f=291
DJ: zero vma section reloc detected: `.rodata.very.long.section$1234' #16 f=291
DJ: zero vma section reloc detected: `.reloc' #3 f=2113795
The test case .S file is attached.
Should I be expecting the warnings? Could it be related to
http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2009-02/threads.html#00137
?
cheers,
DaveK
.text
.global _start
.global _mainCRTStartup
_start:
_mainCRTStartup:
.byte 1
.global data
.data
data:
.byte 2
.section .text.very.long.section.name,"rx"
vls:
.byte 3
.section .data$1,"wd"
.byte 4
.section .rodata$1,"rd"
.byte 5
.section .data$123,"wd"
.byte 4
.section .rodata$123,"rd"
.byte 5
.section .data$123456789,"wd"
.byte 4
.section .rodata$123456789,"rd"
.byte 5
.section .data.very.long.section,"wd"
.byte 6
.section .rodata.very.long.section,"rd"
.byte 7
.section .data.very.long.section$1,"wd"
.byte 6
.section .rodata.very.long.section$1,"rd"
.byte 7
.section .data.very.long.section$1234,"wd"
.byte 6
.section .rodata.very.long.section$1234,"rd"
.byte 7
.end