This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: Preventing preemption of 'protected' symbols in GNU ld 2.26
- From: Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>
- To: Cary Coutant <ccoutant at gmail dot com>
- Cc: "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>, Joe Groff <jgroff at apple dot com>, Alan Modra <amodra at gmail dot com>, Binutils <binutils at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2016 18:52:55 -0600
- Subject: Re: Preventing preemption of 'protected' symbols in GNU ld 2.26
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <AB592ABD-D6D7-4D2F-A0D6-45738F168DC4 at apple dot com> <BEDD88C6-7F80-45DA-9021-10587244AAE5 at apple dot com> <CAMe9rOq6rmvH458nufzfZnnU_=_n1yysbLzERNy-LWvEmjmN1A at mail dot gmail dot com> <983472E1-A1BC-4970-9CF9-0138A6BAD16D at apple dot com> <CAMe9rOqTTwirymAY6ORp6D_GnCsMc_hYEdy1NbZpG6x5vQc5DQ at mail dot gmail dot com> <6AAD87D2-90F9-4AD7-A195-AC91B76EA6AE at apple dot com> <CAMe9rOqNcYnm1YocG-m7XNDE0g68YQAGe=ULP-G98gaatpxSeA at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAJimCsHfT=cfb4kZysB2W_1HFfOq==TpP=wa47XPGB41MHmGyQ at mail dot gmail dot com> <56FB5061 dot 9010303 at redhat dot com> <CAJimCsGNESdZwgYfo6mkwsoj2j7o+odOTF4gKuWpAUDGXDU1+A at mail dot gmail dot com>
On 03/30/2016 06:40 PM, Cary Coutant wrote:
I don't think it was many -- I certainly recall the arm/aarch64 variant.
There may have been one other varasm.c change in this space or I might
be conflating it with the arm/aarch64 change. Tracking those down is
naturally part of this work.
It would help me immensely on the GCC side if things if you and Alan could
easily summarize correct behavior and the impact if we were to just revert
HJ's change. A testcase would be amazingly helpful too.
It looks like it's not just the one change. There's this patch:
which took the idea that protected can still be pre-empted by a COPY
relocation and extended it to three more targets that use COPY
I wonder how many other patches have been based on the same misunderstanding?