[Bug ld/22842] Handling of R_X86_64_PC32 in a PIE against a function in a shared library could be better

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22842 --- Comment #14 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org --- The master branch has been updated by H.J. Lu : https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=fc999e8020ffe8e1136da70f275bceafaa62a588 commit

[Bug ld/22842] Handling of R_X86_64_PC32 in a PIE against a function in a shared library could be better

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22842 Jeremi changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jeremip11 at gmail dot com -- You are

[Bug ld/22842] Handling of R_X86_64_PC32 in a PIE against a function in a shared library could be better

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22842 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Version|unspecified

[Bug ld/22842] Handling of R_X86_64_PC32 in a PIE against a function in a shared library could be better

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22842 --- Comment #12 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org --- The master branch has been updated by H.J. Lu : https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=451875b4f976a527395e9303224c7881b65e12ed commit

[Bug ld/22842] Handling of R_X86_64_PC32 in a PIE against a function in a shared library could be better

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22842 --- Comment #9 from Rafael Ávila de Espíndola --- (In reply to Cary Coutant from comment #8) > I still believe that the linker is working as intended. If you want the > address of the PLT entry, use the PLT32 reloc. Why should -pie make a

[Bug ld/22842] Handling of R_X86_64_PC32 in a PIE against a function in a shared library could be better

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22842 --- Comment #11 from H.J. Lu --- (In reply to Rafael Ávila de Espíndola from comment #9) > (In reply to Cary Coutant from comment #8) > > I still believe that the linker is working as intended. If you want the > > address of the PLT entry,

[Bug ld/22842] Handling of R_X86_64_PC32 in a PIE against a function in a shared library could be better

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22842 --- Comment #9 from Rafael Ávila de Espíndola --- (In reply to Cary Coutant from comment #8) > I still believe that the linker is working as intended. If you want the > address of the PLT entry, use the PLT32 reloc. Why should -pie make a

[Bug ld/22842] Handling of R_X86_64_PC32 in a PIE against a function in a shared library could be better

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22842 --- Comment #8 from Cary Coutant --- I still believe that the linker is working as intended. If you want the address of the PLT entry, use the PLT32 reloc. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

[Bug ld/22842] Handling of R_X86_64_PC32 in a PIE against a function in a shared library could be better

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22842 --- Comment #7 from H.J. Lu --- (In reply to Rafael Ávila de Espíndola from comment #6) > (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #5) > > (In reply to Rafael Ávila de Espíndola from comment #4) > > > (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #3) > > > > >

[Bug ld/22842] Handling of R_X86_64_PC32 in a PIE against a function in a shared library could be better

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22842 --- Comment #6 from Rafael Ávila de Espíndola --- (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #5) > (In reply to Rafael Ávila de Espíndola from comment #4) > > (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #3) > > > > > Should I close the bug and open a new one

[Bug ld/22842] Handling of R_X86_64_PC32 in a PIE against a function in a shared library could be better

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22842 --- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu --- (In reply to Rafael Ávila de Espíndola from comment #4) > (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #3) > > Should I close the bug and open a new one for gold or just reassign this one? Please leave it open for now

[Bug ld/22842] Handling of R_X86_64_PC32 in a PIE against a function in a shared library could be better

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22842 --- Comment #4 from Rafael Ávila de Espíndola --- (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #3) > (In reply to Rafael Ávila de Espíndola from comment #2) > > (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #1) > > > Created attachment 10816 [details] > > > A patch

[Bug ld/22842] Handling of R_X86_64_PC32 in a PIE against a function in a shared library could be better

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22842 --- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu --- (In reply to Rafael Ávila de Espíndola from comment #2) > (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #1) > > Created attachment 10816 [details] > > A patch > > > > Please try this. > > The runtime warning is gone, but

[Bug ld/22842] Handling of R_X86_64_PC32 in a PIE against a function in a shared library could be better

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22842 --- Comment #2 from Rafael Ávila de Espíndola --- (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #1) > Created attachment 10816 [details] > A patch > > Please try this. The runtime warning is gone, but I still get two different values for the address:

[Bug ld/22842] Handling of R_X86_64_PC32 in a PIE against a function in a shared library could be better

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22842 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug ld/22842] Handling of R_X86_64_PC32 in a PIE against a function in a shared library could be better

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22842 --- Comment #1 from H.J. Lu --- Created attachment 10816 --> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10816=edit A patch Please try this. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.