This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: S/390: Avoid relocations in .eh_frame section

From: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>
To: Ulrich Weigand <weigand at immd1 dot informatik dot uni-erlangen dot de>
Cc: jakub at redhat dot com, dje at watson dot ibm dot com, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, uweigand at de dot ibm dot com
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2002 13:18:47 -0800
Subject: Re: S/390: Avoid relocations in .eh_frame section
References: <20021119173145.O27455@devserv.devel.redhat.com> <200211201958.UAA07895@faui11.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>

On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 08:58:03PM +0100, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
> I've never quite understood that 'bases' stuff :-/  How would
> I set this up?  Don't new binutils completely eliminate the
> need for __register_frame_XXX calls?

Yes, I'd forgotten about that.  What happens instead with
PT_GNU_EH_FRAME is that you have to be able to derive the
base address from the Phdrs.  E.g. the DT_PLTGOT entry for
the x86 "data" base address.

r~

References:
- Re: S/390: Avoid relocations in .eh_frame section
  - From: Jakub Jelinek
- Re: S/390: Avoid relocations in .eh_frame section
  - From: Ulrich Weigand

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]