From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23678 invoked by alias); 11 Jul 2018 13:40:42 -0000 Mailing-List: contact elfutils-devel-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: Sender: elfutils-devel-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 23664 invoked by uid 89); 11 Jul 2018 13:40:41 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Checked: by ClamAV 0.99.4 on sourceware.org X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=HContent-Transfer-Encoding:8bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on sourceware.org X-Spam-Level: X-HELO: mx1.suse.de Received: from mx2.suse.de (HELO mx1.suse.de) (195.135.220.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Wed, 11 Jul 2018 13:40:40 +0000 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.220.254]) by mx1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B9FBAD61; Wed, 11 Jul 2018 13:40:38 +0000 (UTC) From: Andreas Schwab To: Mark Wielaard Cc: elfutils-devel@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] backends: add abi_cfi and register_info callbacks for RISC-V References: <20180614232812.GG7539@wildebeest.org> <1529493408.12946.131.camel@klomp.org> <1529499550.12946.137.camel@klomp.org> <1529527688.12946.141.camel@klomp.org> X-Yow: It's the RINSE CYCLE!! They've ALL IGNORED the RINSE CYCLE!! Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2018 13:40:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <1529527688.12946.141.camel@klomp.org> (Mark Wielaard's message of "Wed, 20 Jun 2018 22:48:08 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-SW-Source: 2018-q3/txt/msg00015.txt.bz2 On Jun 20 2018, Mark Wielaard wrote: > aha, ok, but it looks like RISCV_(ADD|SUB)(8|16|32|64) should not be > too hard to handle. The other ones (RISCV_SETX) might be a little > harder. The SETX relocs are simple absolute relocs (SET32 is the same as 32, but the dynamic linker does not need to handle SETX). > They are not used much though and only against .debug_frame. So > if you get RISC_ADD/SUB going that probably handles most uses. Both size --reloc-debug-sections and readelf -wframe need to handle all relocs, including SET6/ADD6/SUB6. Andreas. -- Andreas Schwab, SUSE Labs, schwab@suse.de GPG Key fingerprint = 0196 BAD8 1CE9 1970 F4BE 1748 E4D4 88E3 0EEA B9D7 "And now for something completely different."