This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: [RFC][PATCH] MIPS ifunc for binutils
- From: Jack Carter <jack dot carter at imgtec dot com>
- To: <binutils at sourceware dot org>, <rdsandiford at googlemail dot com>
- Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2013 05:34:08 -0700
- Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] MIPS ifunc for binutils
- References: <4CEFBC1BE64A8048869F799EF2D2EEEE01AAE1F0 at BADAG02 dot ba dot imgtec dot org> <87k3jgf6bb dot fsf at talisman dot default> <521421F2 dot 9070304 at imgtec dot com> <87fvu3foum dot fsf at talisman dot default>
So I don't mess up the conversation, I'll make the easy changes so far
suggested, play with preemption and resubmit the patch for review. It
will allow me to focus on the ABI issues going forward. I also have a
request to produce a formal ABI doc for the MIPS ifunc implementation. I
will add that as well so that when we come to agreement, we will have
agreed to the same thing.
When resubmitting, do I change the subject of the email. Otherwise I
will keep it as "Re: [RFC][PATCH] MIPS ifunc for binutils".
I worked for MIPS and then SGI for a long time so my nomenclature needs
to be updated to fit binutils. For me there were 3 flavors of what we
call-shared (CPIC - not exactly what it is in gnu land)
I think from what you have stated that these translate to:
normal executable (ET_EXEC)
I will change to use the gnu version. I still struggle with not calling
the dynamic linker "rld". Old dog, new tricks.