This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the binutils project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: ld -z options

Talking to myself...

On Thu, 14 Jul 2011, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> This caused several test-cases to go from PASS to UNRESOLVED for
> cris-axis-linux-gnu

It seems this would happen for e.g. ia64-*-linux-gnu too.

> All preceded by a linker warning ".../ld-new: warning: -z relro
> ignored." in ld.log.  The UNRESOLVED status then cause the
> check-ld to return error.  According to the dejagnu docs, the
> UNRESOLVED is an indication of an error in the testsuite (likely
> the unexpected warning).

That's a bug in ld-elf/binutils.exp or the new warning message;
binutils.exp tests [string match "*not supported*" $link_output]
             || [string match "*unrecognized option*" $link_output]
which doesn't match "warning: -z relro ignored.".

Which one should be adjusted?

> Hm, at a second glance many other ports set
> triggers the recognition of e.g. "-z relro" but why would I have
> to set that when there's just one page-size?

This seems the wrong default, and emulparams/
should set something to disable -z relro instead of everyone
else setting some vaguely related variable.  Or is that's too
linux-centric?  Maybe create a ${srcdir}/emulparams/
for emulparams/*.sh to include?

> And aren't the tests not really testing -z relro
> if they passed anyway?

Doh, they aren't testing that option, that's just a combination
tested for objcopy/strip/whatever producing the same result
with/without that option.

brgds, H-P

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]