This is the mail archive of the binutils@sources.redhat.com 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: got and plt section attributes

From: Alan Modra <amodra at bigpond dot net dot au>
To: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
Cc: binutils at sources dot redhat dot com, "H.J. Lu" <hongjiu dot lu at intel dot com>
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2003 00:31:12 +0930
Subject: Re: got and plt section attributes
References: <20030728142440.GY27145@bubble.sa.bigpond.net.au> <20030728144245.GP20507@sunsite.ms.mff.cuni.cz>

On Mon, Jul 28, 2003 at 04:42:45PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 28, 2003 at 11:54:40PM +0930, Alan Modra wrote:
> > -    SHT_PROGBITS,	0 },
> > +    SHT_PROGBITS,	SHF_ALLOC + SHF_EXECINSTR },
> 
> .plt is SHF_ALLOC + SHF_WRITE + SHF_EXECINSTR on about half of ELF arches I
> think (and SHT_NOBITS on ppc/ppc64).
> Do we really expect half of the arches to define their own special_section
> table with .plt section, or shouldn't backends inform ELF generic code
> whether they use .got.plt or not?

I'm not too worried really.  This table mostly is about getting section
attributes correct for the assembler, and people don't tend to put
things in .plt by hand.

-- 
Alan Modra
IBM OzLabs - Linux Technology Centre

References:
- got and plt section attributes
  - From: Alan Modra
- Re: got and plt section attributes
  - From: Jakub Jelinek

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