linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: RFC: Adding non-PIC executable support to MIPS

To: binutils@sourceware.org, gcc@gcc.gnu.org, linux-mips@linux-mips.org, rdsandiford@googlemail.com
Subject: Re: RFC: Adding non-PIC executable support to MIPS
From: Daniel Jacobowitz <dan@debian.org>
Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2008 16:29:14 -0400
In-reply-to: <87abh0m56d.fsf@firetop.home>
Mail-followup-to: binutils@sourceware.org, gcc@gcc.gnu.org, linux-mips@linux-mips.org, rdsandiford@googlemail.com
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
References: <87y74pxwyl.fsf@firetop.home> <20080701202236.GA1534@caradoc.them.org> <87zlp149ot.fsf@firetop.home> <20080702120829.GA12595@caradoc.them.org> <87abh0m56d.fsf@firetop.home>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2008-05-11)
On Wed, Jul 02, 2008 at 08:55:54PM +0100, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> The size of the header and first 0x10000 stubs would be the same.
> I think it would also preserve the resolver interface while removing
> the need for the extra-large .plts.  The only incompatibility I can
> see would be that objdump on older executables would not get the
> foo@plt symbols right for large indices.
> 
> OTOH, perhaps you could argue that the extra complication of the
> two PLT entries doesn't count for much given that the code is
> already written.  It's just an idea.

Your version looks fine to me, it's ABI-preserving, the PLT entries
still work for MIPS I and still have the same runtime cost when not
resolving.  I like it - thanks!

I'm not worried about making people upgrade objdump, either.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery

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