Hi all, > The discussion might be moot. Yesterday I tried to rebase on more > recent SimulAVR sources and, unfortunately, it's no longer possible. > A few days ago somebody replaced the entire ELF reading stuff with > something completely different (commit "substitute libbfd and > libiberty, read elf file by ElfIO"), so the SIMINFO mechanism would > have to be rewritten and re-tested from scratch, too.
I am also a bit doubtfull for this replacement. My point was, that I expect the first problem if something changes in libbfd/iberty without changing in ElfIO. A lot of my tooling is also based on bfd directly. I had no chance to test these features until now. My wish was to get a tag in git for the last version BEFORE this big change. Maybe it is better to let ElfIO in a development branch. As I know the idea was to remove the dependency for libbfd, but from my point of few this is not really possible, because the compiler/linker use it and simulavr must be able to read exactly what the compiler generate. Thomas think this is not a problem?! I have never played with ElfIO, so I can't give there any hint. But I was very comfortable with the libbfd solution. Coming back to the problem regarding the sections of the elf file to place any additional informations in. The question is not, if partial linking is provided or not. The information will be linked in the target files if the linker script has a section for that purpose. If you have a look into the linker scripts, there is already a signature section for the infos. I think any meta data for type of cpu, clock etc can go there. There is no need to allocate real memory or any new section which must be considered in the linking stage. But maybe I am on the wrong track?! Regards Klaus _______________________________________________ Simulavr-devel mailing list Simulavr-devel@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/simulavr-devel
