Re: Proposal for STT_GNU_IFUNC and R_*_IRELATIVE

["H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>]

On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 8:43 AM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 8:31 AM, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@novell.com> wrote:
>>>>> "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com> 26.05.09 16:39 >>>
>>>2. How should locally defined symbols with the new type be handled?
>>>
>>>I don't see the fundamental difference between the new relocation and
>>>the new DT_* tags. The end result is the same. If your OS doesn't support
>>>them, the application will crash if they are used. I will propose a new
>>>x86-64 psABI extension, which will be optional. If an OS supports
>>>STT_GNU_IFUNC, it must support R_X86_64_IRELATIVE.
>>
>> The fundamental difference is that the new-relocation-type approach is
>> not matching the general ELF idea, whereas the new dynamic-tag-approach
>> fits well with other ELF definitions.
>>
>
> Relocation types are defined in the psABI. I don't see any problems
> with R_X86_64_IRELATIVE.
>

Here is the proposed update for x86-64 psABI.


-- 
H.J.

Attachment: x86-64-psABI-ifunc-1.patch
Description: Text document