From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7638 invoked by alias); 26 Mar 2005 17:27:45 -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 7631 invoked from network); 26 Mar 2005 17:27:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO wigwam.mikroweb.hu) (193.17.175.10) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 26 Mar 2005 17:27:42 -0000 Received: from [10.1.43.89] (helo=mail.bridge.intra) by wigwam.mikroweb.hu with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DFF4F-0001zA-EQ; Sat, 26 Mar 2005 18:27:29 +0100 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76D2A3906; Sat, 26 Mar 2005 18:27:20 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail.bridge.intra ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (lnx.bridge.intra [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 08621-01; Sat, 26 Mar 2005 18:27:10 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail.bridge.intra (Postfix, from userid 200) id C93DF39C5; Sat, 26 Mar 2005 18:27:09 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.bridge.intra (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78D603906; Sat, 26 Mar 2005 18:27:09 +0100 (CET) Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 22:57:00 -0000 From: "Peter S. Mazinger" To: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: binutils@sourceware.org Subject: Re: elf32-arm.c corrections In-Reply-To: <20050320153916.GA26320@nevyn.them.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-SW-Source: 2005-03/txt/msg00798.txt.bz2 On Sun, 20 Mar 2005, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > On Sun, Mar 20, 2005 at 10:26:12AM +0100, Peter S. Mazinger wrote: > > On Sat, 19 Mar 2005, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > > > > > On Sun, Mar 20, 2005 at 02:15:24AM +0100, Peter S. Mazinger wrote: > > > > Hello! > > > > > > > > add_dynamic_entry: changes !info->shared to info->executable (PIE) > > > > corrects typo, and syncs up with other archs (some others could do the > > > > same). For !relocs the hole part would be omitted, probably some speed gain. > > > > > > Um, why are disabling the setting of DT_TEXTREL for shared libraries? > > > > The 1 line removal is because none of the archs has that. > > The i386 implementation has everything within if (relocs), the other > > archs have it outside, but DT_TEXTREL is only valid for if (relocs), so we > > would omit that part gaining some speed > > Ah, not enough context in the diff. Makes sense. Please apply then, I have signed aggreement, no cvs access Thanks, Peter > > > > > Should the other patch (*3) for allocate_dynrelocs be applied (as done for > > > > ppc32)? > > > > > > Probably. > > > > I am asking it, because no other arch has that, only ppc32, so there must > > be some other solution to that as well. > > > > > > > > > Why is ELIMINATE_COPY_RELOCS not used for arm? > > > > > > Because no one implemented it. > > > > Would the implementation make the binaries smaller? > > Not appreciably. > > -- Peter S. Mazinger ID: 0xA5F059F2 Key fingerprint = 92A4 31E1 56BC 3D5A 2D08 BB6E C389 975E A5F0 59F2