[Top] [All Lists]

Re: "relocation truncated to fit"

To: Brad Barrett <>
Subject: Re: "relocation truncated to fit"
From: Thiemo Seufer <>
Date: Tue, 27 May 2003 21:26:44 +0200
Cc: "'Linux-Mips@Linux-Mips. Org'" <>
In-reply-to: <>
Mail-followup-to: ica2_ts, Brad Barrett <>, "'Linux-Mips@Linux-Mips. Org'" <>
Original-recipient: rfc822;
References: <>
User-agent: Mutt/1.4i
Brad Barrett wrote:
> Preface:
> --------
> I have a userspace toolchain issue.  I'm not sure where to post it, so I'll
> start here. is probably the better place for this.

> I built the cross-tools myself.  They are now about 6-8 months old.  They
> consist of:
> - gcc version 3.2.1 20020903 (prerelease)
> - GNU ld version 20021010  [from H.J. Lu]
> - glibc version 2.2.5

An upgrade is IMHO the best solution:
gcc 3.3 will fix some "branch out of range" issues, and binutils
newer than implement multigot. Both together should
solve the problem.

> What I know:
> ------------
> Googling hasn't turn up much, with the exception of an intriguing exchange 
> from
> Sept 2001  on this mailing list:

The GOT overflow problem is quite well known, it hits every largish
executable for O32 MIPS. Most notably Mozilla and parts of KDE were
affected, too.

> Petter Reinholdtsen reports similar messages when (native) compiling "a huge 
> C++
> program" (actually Opera) on an Indy:
> Wilbern Cobb suggests using -G4, -G2, or -G1, which Petter reports reduces the
> messages but does not eliminate them.

These reduce GOT usage at the expense of speed and size, so they
help a bit as workaround.

> Then Ryan Murray says that every static
> library used in the link, including libc_noshared.a and libgcc.a, must be
> compiled with -Wa,xgot.

Would also work, but is binary incompatible then.


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