https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24673
Jim Wilson <wilson at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed| |2019-06-12
CC| |wilson at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Jim Wilson <wilson at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The DTPMOD64 reloc is required for a shared library, and a PIE program is
basically a shared library with a few differences. So this is probably a
failure to distinguish between pie and shared, and optimize them differently.
With this completely untested patch
diff --git a/bfd/elfnn-riscv.c b/bfd/elfnn-riscv.c
index 69cadaa..ed8b9f1 100644
--- a/bfd/elfnn-riscv.c
+++ b/bfd/elfnn-riscv.c
@@ -2182,7 +2182,7 @@ riscv_elf_relocate_section (bfd *output_bfd,
/* The GOT entries have not been initialized yet. Do it
now, and emit any relocations. */
- if ((bfd_link_pic (info) || indx != 0)
+ if ((bfd_link_dll (info) || indx != 0)
&& (h == NULL
|| ELF_ST_VISIBILITY (h->other) == STV_DEFAULT
|| h->root.type != bfd_link_hash_undefweak))
I now get a R_RISCV_NONE for both the no-pie and pie cases, and still get a
DTPMOD64 reloc for the shared case. This also makes the RISC-V code look more
like the MIPS code, so is probably correct.
I see that there are no uses of bfd_link_dll in elfnn-riscv.c currently, so
there are probably other similar cases to fix.
I haven't looked at why we get the R_RISCV_NONE yet.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
_______________________________________________
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
