Shaun Jackman writes:
> Hello Richard, Dan,
>
> I'm trying to track down which part of the GCC source tree makes the
> decision to emit either a R_ARM_GOT32 or a R_ARM_GOTOFF32 relocation.
> A new feature in GCC 4.1 emits a R_ARM_GOTOFF32 relocation for a
> reference to a static function. I
On Wed, Jun 28, 2006 at 11:20:00AM -0600, Shaun Jackman wrote:
> Hello Richard, Dan,
>
> I'm trying to track down which part of the GCC source tree makes the
> decision to emit either a R_ARM_GOT32 or a R_ARM_GOTOFF32 relocation.
> A new feature in GCC 4.1 emits a R_ARM_GOTOFF32 relocation for a
>
On 6/28/06, Daniel Jacobowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
GOTOFF support has been there for a long while. Only use of it for
static functions is recent. It should be easy to find. But this is
not at all the only problem. GCC's PIC model assumes a fixed
displacement between segments.
Even if
On Wed, Jun 28, 2006 at 03:17:30PM -0600, Shaun Jackman wrote:
> I'm not terribly familiar with the GCC source tree. I scanned
> config/arm/arm.c and its SVN log for changes that might affect
> GOTOFF32, but came up empty. Do you know where the decision of GOT or
> GOTOFF would be handled?
Sorry,
On 6/28/06, Daniel Jacobowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Wed, Jun 28, 2006 at 03:17:30PM -0600, Shaun Jackman wrote:
> I'm not terribly familiar with the GCC source tree. I scanned
> config/arm/arm.c and its SVN log for changes that might affect
> GOTOFF32, but came up empty. Do you know where
On Wed, Jun 28, 2006 at 03:54:29PM -0600, Shaun Jackman wrote:
> On 6/28/06, Daniel Jacobowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >On Wed, Jun 28, 2006 at 03:17:30PM -0600, Shaun Jackman wrote:
> >> I'm not terribly familiar with the GCC source tree. I scanned
> >> config/arm/arm.c and its SVN log for ch
On Thu, 2006-06-29 at 03:47, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 28, 2006 at 03:54:29PM -0600, Shaun Jackman wrote:
> > On 6/28/06, Daniel Jacobowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >On Wed, Jun 28, 2006 at 03:17:30PM -0600, Shaun Jackman wrote:
> > >> I'm not terribly familiar with the GCC sourc
On 6/28/06, Daniel Jacobowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It was probably me. But why can't you do this yourself? Look at the
assembly. See what the output string is. Search for it in
config/arm/. Use svn blame, as already suggested.
I did search the assembler text and found the constant an
On 6/29/06, Richard Earnshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
No, it was PhilB, but it must have been two or three years ago now.
Thanks, Richard. I suspect svn r71881 is responsible. I'll start
testing and hopefully put a patch together. I would suspect r49871,
but this patch is in 4.0.3, which does
