linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Binutils fixed to deal with 'insmod' issue and discussion...

To: linux-mips@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: Binutils fixed to deal with 'insmod' issue and discussion...
From: Thiemo Seufer <ica2_ts@csv.ica.uni-stuttgart.de>
Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2001 18:12:42 +0200
In-reply-to: <20010403102608.A30531@bacchus.dhis.org>; from ralf@oss.sgi.com on Tue, Apr 03, 2001 at 10:26:09AM +0200
References: <00a901c0bb6f$d3e77820$0deca8c0@Ulysses> <3AC90E16.AEF59359@cotw.com> <20010403041740.G5099@rembrandt.csv.ica.uni-stuttgart.de> <20010403102608.A30531@bacchus.dhis.org>
Sender: owner-linux-mips@oss.sgi.com
User-agent: Mutt/1.3.15i
Ralf Baechle wrote:
>On Tue, Apr 03, 2001 at 04:17:40AM +0200, Thiemo Seufer wrote:
>
>> >Without the binutils patch, all binaries compiled for MIPS/Linux
>> >will be IRIX flavored which was the whole problem.
>> 
>> Please may You elaborate about this? AFAICS, the IRIX flavour
>> can't be a problem by itself.
>
>> Changing the MIPS/Linux ABI to circumvent a toolchain bug seems
>> to be a bit extremistic. Am I missing some important details?
>
>IRIX ELF orders the symbol table of object files in a way that violates
>the ABI.  Worse, these IRIX specialities are not documented anywhere.

That would be ok, but, according to the source, there are also
different maximum offsets for ELF_MIPS_GP_OFFSET, which is hardcoded
to IRIX standard in gas, and different section namings like
.MIPS.options vs. .options. 

>Changing to ABI ELF only makes them look as they're supposed to ...

At least the section naming is specified different.


Thiemo

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>