Re: relocation overflow

[Camm Maguire <camm at enhanced dot com>]

Greetings, and thanks for your reply.

The relocation type is R_PPC_REL24.  I've got the failure up now in
gdb and can backtrace into the bfd library if this would help.

Take care,

Breakpoint 1, mreloc_overflow (link_info=0x10846afc, 
    name=0x12754c59 "do_init", reloc_name=0x107fd95c "R_PPC_REL24", addend=0, 
    abfd=0x127493bc, section=0x1275b014, address=28) at sfaslbfd.c:138
138	  printf("reloc for %s is overflowing\n",name);
(gdb) hello


Alan Modra <amodra@bigpond.net.au> writes:

> On Tue, Nov 19, 2002 at 10:26:30PM -0500, Camm Maguire wrote:
> > Greetings!  On ppc, GCL loads binary object modules at specific
> > address in its lisp core, relocating them via a call to
> > bfd_get_relocated_section_contents.  This works in general, but in
> > certain cases of many such loadings and a large base executable, the
> > routine reports that function symbols in the module overflow on
> > attempted relocation.  I thought this was a TOC issue, and could be
> > addressed via -mminimal-toc, but no dice.  All tests thus far with gcc
> > 2.95, but I'm inclined to think that 3.2 will be the same.  
> > 
> > Does this problem ring a bell (and hopefully a solution) with anyone?
> 
> Relocation type?
> 
> -- 
> Alan Modra
> IBM OzLabs - Linux Technology Centre
> 
> 

-- 
Camm Maguire			     			camm@enhanced.com
==========================================================================
"The earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens."  --  Baha'u'llah