[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       binutils
Subject:    Re: Empty sbss sections on ARM
From:       Richard Earnshaw <rearnsha () arm ! com>
Date:       2003-09-26 15:57:39
Message-ID: 200309261557.h8QFvdf10030 () pc960 ! cambridge ! arm ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

> Is there any reason not to apply this patch?  None of the other sbss
> infrastructure appears to be present for ARM.
> 
> In other news, the empty .sbss section created without this patch is marked
> as alignment 2**0, SHT_PROGBITS, CONTENTS.  Which is obviously wrong but I'm
> not sure how to fix that.  That's what got me looking at the problem; the
> prelinker in some situations gets quite upset by this.
> 
> -- 
> Daniel Jacobowitz
> MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer
> 
> 2003-09-26  Daniel Jacobowitz  <drow@mvista.com>
> 
> 	* emulparams/armelf_linux.sh: Define NO_SMALL_DATA.
> 
> --- binutils-2.14/ld/emulparams/armelf_linux.sh.orig	2003-09-26 11:08:26.000000000 -0400
> +++ binutils-2.14/ld/emulparams/armelf_linux.sh	2003-09-26 11:08:52.000000000 -0400
> @@ -16,3 +16,5 @@ OTHER_BSS_SYMBOLS='__bss_start__ = .;'
>  OTHER_BSS_END_SYMBOLS='_bss_end__ = . ; __bss_end__ = . ; __end__ = . ;'
>  
>  TEXT_START_ADDR=0x00008000
> +
> +NO_SMALL_DATA=yes

I think this should be done for all ARM/ELF configurations.  ARM 
processors don't have support for .sfoo sections.

It strikes me as somewhat bizzare that one has to disable this when not 
needed rather than enable it when needed.  Ho hum...

R.

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]