From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5303 invoked by alias); 26 Oct 2010 17:03:29 -0000 Received: (qmail 5287 invoked by uid 22791); 26 Oct 2010 17:03:28 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from smtp-out.google.com (HELO smtp-out.google.com) (74.125.121.35) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 26 Oct 2010 17:03:23 +0000 Received: from wpaz33.hot.corp.google.com (wpaz33.hot.corp.google.com [172.24.198.97]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id o9QH3KlC000415 for ; Tue, 26 Oct 2010 10:03:20 -0700 Received: from qwd7 (qwd7.prod.google.com [10.241.193.199]) by wpaz33.hot.corp.google.com with ESMTP id o9QH1T6s007610 for ; Tue, 26 Oct 2010 10:03:19 -0700 Received: by qwd7 with SMTP id 7so3052300qwd.24 for ; Tue, 26 Oct 2010 10:03:19 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.229.65.25 with SMTP id g25mr548361qci.196.1288112599032; Tue, 26 Oct 2010 10:03:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.229.141.15 with HTTP; Tue, 26 Oct 2010 10:03:18 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20100722165443.GA26398@intel.com> <20100722170606.GA26393@caradoc.them.org> <20100722195924.GA4912@caradoc.them.org> Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2010 17:03:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: PATCH: Extend .zdebug section support to binutils and ld From: Cary Coutant To: binutils@sourceware.org Cc: "H.J. Lu" , Alan Modra Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-System-Of-Record: true X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact binutils-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: binutils-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2010-10/txt/msg00444.txt.bz2 Ping? I'd like to see binutils and gnu ld supporting compressed debug secti= ons. -cary On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 1:37 PM, Cary Coutant wrote: > On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 12:59 PM, Daniel Jacobowitz > wrote: >> That doesn't tell me anything. =A0What is the right thing to do, now >> that you've made binutils do it? =A0Do you have to uncompress the >> section and then apply relocations to it? >> >> If you do, there's no separate issue - don't check this in unless >> objects are marked in such a way that other tools will immediately >> reject them. > > Yes, it would be an improvement to mark compressed sections with a new > section type and SHF_OS_NONCONFORMING, but the ".zdebug" mechanism is > already there right now, and it would be nice to have this patch to > make the utilities work with what the assembler is producing today. > The renaming convention was established a couple of years ago as a > cheap way of preventing unaware tools of choking on these sections -- > this patch fixes a bug that was introduced then (trying to apply > relocations before decompressing), but not actually exposed until gas > started generating relocatable compressed sections. > > I'm not sure I understand why this patch should be held up until we > implement a more foolproof mechanism. Adding this patch shouldn't > prevent us from pursuing the better solution, but it will improve > things in the meantime. > > -cary >