From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4852 invoked by alias); 20 Oct 2010 17:41:02 -0000 Received: (qmail 4742 invoked by uid 22791); 20 Oct 2010 17:41:01 -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) (216.239.44.51) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 20 Oct 2010 17:40:55 +0000 Received: from wpaz17.hot.corp.google.com (wpaz17.hot.corp.google.com [172.24.198.81]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id o9KHesHp004653 for ; Wed, 20 Oct 2010 10:40:54 -0700 Received: from gwj16 (gwj16.prod.google.com [10.200.10.16]) by wpaz17.hot.corp.google.com with ESMTP id o9KHeqWo004918 for ; Wed, 20 Oct 2010 10:40:53 -0700 Received: by gwj16 with SMTP id 16so2414750gwj.18 for ; Wed, 20 Oct 2010 10:40:52 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.229.73.132 with SMTP id q4mr6732998qcj.132.1287596452553; Wed, 20 Oct 2010 10:40:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.229.141.15 with HTTP; Wed, 20 Oct 2010 10:40:52 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2010 17:41:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [GOLD][PATCH] Set SHF_LINK_ORDER flags of ARM EXIDX sections. From: Cary Coutant To: =?UTF-8?B?RG91ZyBLd2FuICjpl5zmjK/lvrcp?= Cc: Ian Lance Taylor , binutils 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/msg00328.txt.bz2 > Here is a new patch. =A0I changed the code in layout.cc so that > SHF_LINK_ORDER is not filter in a relocatable link. =A0I also added a > check in the ARM back-end to warn about EXIDX input sections without > SHF_LINK_ORDER flags. Thanks, that looks better! As a separate issue, there may be a couple of other flags we don't want to clear for -r links as well. I'll take a closer look at that. -cary