* PATCH: Fix typo in elf32-mips.c
@ 2001-08-30 8:26 H . J . Lu
2001-08-30 14:34 ` Geoff Keating
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: H . J . Lu @ 2001-08-30 8:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: binutils
I checked in the following patch as an obvious fix.
H.J.
-----
2001-08-30 H.J. Lu <hjl@gnu.org>
* elf32-mips.c (mips_elf_calculate_relocation): Don't create
dynamic relocation for undefined weak symbols when creating
executables. Check h->root.root.type, instead of h->root.type.
--- elf32-mips.c.dynamic Thu Aug 30 08:00:39 2001
+++ elf32-mips.c Thu Aug 30 08:06:21 2001
@@ -6334,7 +6334,8 @@ mips_elf_calculate_relocation (abfd,
if ((info->shared
|| (elf_hash_table (info)->dynamic_sections_created
&& h != NULL
- && (h->root.type == bfd_link_hash_defweak
+ && h->root.root.type != bfd_link_hash_undefweak
+ && (h->root.root.type == bfd_link_hash_defweak
|| (h->root.elf_link_hash_flags
& ELF_LINK_HASH_DEF_REGULAR) == 0)))
&& (input_section->flags & SEC_ALLOC) != 0)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread* Re: PATCH: Fix typo in elf32-mips.c
2001-08-30 8:26 PATCH: Fix typo in elf32-mips.c H . J . Lu
@ 2001-08-30 14:34 ` Geoff Keating
2001-08-30 14:36 ` H . J . Lu
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Geoff Keating @ 2001-08-30 14:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: hjl; +Cc: binutils
> Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2001 08:26:16 -0700
> From: "H . J . Lu" <hjl@lucon.org>
> I checked in the following patch as an obvious fix.
I think this is not obvious. In fact, I think it may be wrong.
What happens if a weak symbol is defined by a new version of a shared library?
I really think that patches like this should be properly reviewed. I
am concerned by the trend of certain contributors deciding that any
short patch must be "obvious" and therefore doesn't need approval.
>
> H.J.
> -----
> 2001-08-30 H.J. Lu <hjl@gnu.org>
>
> * elf32-mips.c (mips_elf_calculate_relocation): Don't create
> dynamic relocation for undefined weak symbols when creating
> executables. Check h->root.root.type, instead of h->root.type.
>
> --- elf32-mips.c.dynamic Thu Aug 30 08:00:39 2001
> +++ elf32-mips.c Thu Aug 30 08:06:21 2001
> @@ -6334,7 +6334,8 @@ mips_elf_calculate_relocation (abfd,
> if ((info->shared
> || (elf_hash_table (info)->dynamic_sections_created
> && h != NULL
> - && (h->root.type == bfd_link_hash_defweak
> + && h->root.root.type != bfd_link_hash_undefweak
> + && (h->root.root.type == bfd_link_hash_defweak
> || (h->root.elf_link_hash_flags
> & ELF_LINK_HASH_DEF_REGULAR) == 0)))
> && (input_section->flags & SEC_ALLOC) != 0)
>
--
- Geoffrey Keating <geoffk@geoffk.org>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: PATCH: Fix typo in elf32-mips.c
2001-08-30 14:34 ` Geoff Keating
@ 2001-08-30 14:36 ` H . J . Lu
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: H . J . Lu @ 2001-08-30 14:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Geoff Keating; +Cc: binutils
On Thu, Aug 30, 2001 at 02:52:20PM -0700, Geoff Keating wrote:
> > Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2001 08:26:16 -0700
> > From: "H . J . Lu" <hjl@lucon.org>
>
> > I checked in the following patch as an obvious fix.
>
> I think this is not obvious. In fact, I think it may be wrong.
> What happens if a weak symbol is defined by a new version of a shared library?
>
I have reverted them and checked in a different one to address your
concern.
H.J.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2001-08-30 14:36 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2001-08-30 8:26 PATCH: Fix typo in elf32-mips.c H . J . Lu
2001-08-30 14:34 ` Geoff Keating
2001-08-30 14:36 ` H . J . Lu
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).