From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Lee Smith To: Philip Blundell , Ian Lance Taylor Cc: devans@cygnus.com, bfd@cygnus.com Subject: Re: arm questions Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1999 00:43:00 -0000 Message-id: <3.0.5.32.19990416083918.0099b8a0@mail1.bateman.arm.com> References: <19990415180136.2600.qmail@daffy.airs.com> X-SW-Source: 1999/msg00099.html At 09:36 PM 4/15/99 +0100, Philip Blundell wrote: [SNIP] >In fact as far as Linux is concerned it probably wouldn't be an especially >big deal to introduce RELA in parallel with REL if we wanted to. I think >there were rumblings that the ARM SDT compiler was primarily using RELA, No. ARM only uses REL. We see no advantage to RELA. However, our ELF linker (not yet released) handles RELA or any mix of REL and RELA (as the ELF standard seems to intend). AFAIK, Green Hills uses RELA only in its ARM ELF tool chain. >so we >might end up doing it in order to be able to interwork with them. Our dynamic >linker can be taught to handle binaries with an arbitrary mix of reloc types, >I think, and I imagine binutils can be made to handle this too if it doesn't >already. > >> 2) >> Whats the R_ARM_THM_XPC22 reloc for? >> >>I dunno. Philip Blundell is on the list. Phil, do you know? > >Actually no. Thumb isn't really my area. I've sent a Cc of this mail to Lee >Smith (who did the original assignment of reloc numbers if I remember right). >Lee, any ideas? Actually, it should be R_ARM_THM_XPC23. It applies to an Architecture V5 variant BL instruction. Consider it a placeholder for now. ---Lee