From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16026 invoked by alias); 18 Jul 2003 19:57:42 -0000 Mailing-List: contact binutils-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: binutils-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 16019 invoked from network); 18 Jul 2003 19:57:41 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO frothingslosh.sfbay.redhat.com) (66.187.237.200) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 18 Jul 2003 19:57:41 -0000 Received: from frothingslosh.sfbay.redhat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by frothingslosh.sfbay.redhat.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h6IJvf2m005210; Fri, 18 Jul 2003 12:57:41 -0700 Received: (from rth@localhost) by frothingslosh.sfbay.redhat.com (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id h6IJveb0005208; Fri, 18 Jul 2003 12:57:40 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: frothingslosh.sfbay.redhat.com: rth set sender to rth@redhat.com using -f Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2003 19:57:00 -0000 From: Richard Henderson To: Bob Wilson Cc: binutils@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFC] unify dynamic_symbol_p implementations Message-ID: <20030718195740.GA5202@redhat.com> References: <200307181202.40668.bwilson@tensilica.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200307181202.40668.bwilson@tensilica.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-SW-Source: 2003-07/txt/msg00357.txt.bz2 On Fri, Jul 18, 2003 at 12:02:40PM -0700, Bob Wilson wrote: > I think the "ignore_protected" argument should be 0 for the Xtensa port. A > separate relocation (R_XTENSA_32) is used when taking the address of a > function than when calling it (R_XTENSA_PLT), so there shouldn't be an issue > with incorrectly comparing the PLT addresses instead of the function > addresses. Unless I'm missing something here, you shouldn't have to "assume > the worst". What happens when an executable takes the address of a function defined in a shared library? r~