This is the mail archive of the binutils@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the binutils project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: PATCH for i386: --no-copy-relocs

To: "H . J . Lu" <hjl at lucon dot org>, "Ian Lance Taylor" <ian at airs dot com>
Subject: Re: PATCH for i386: --no-copy-relocs
From: "Jose Luu" <jluu at mainsoft dot com>
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2001 15:40:56 +0200
Cc: <binutils at sources dot redhat dot com>
References: <002101c0f82c$935bf2a0$18671ed4@fr.mainsoft.com><si3d8xe0ev.fsf@daffy.airs.com> <20010619083710.A16422@lucon.org><sibsnj7h0k.fsf@daffy.airs.com> <20010621120541.A3008@lucon.org> <sihex9ft85.fsf@daffy.airs.com>

>
> A program compiled PIC normally does not require a reloc in the text
> segment.  So normally the COPY reloc is not needed in such a case.
>

Now I remember: that's why I did not see relocs in the text
segment, --no-copy-relocs is supposed to be used with -fPIC executables.

I have also tried my patch with non PIC main executables, it also works and
nothing complains.
I can only suppose that the pages are mapped "copy on write" (to allow for
self modifying code?).

Jose

References:
- PATCH for i386: --no-copy-relocs
  - From: Jose Luu
- Re: PATCH for i386: --no-copy-relocs
  - From: Ian Lance Taylor
- Re: PATCH for i386: --no-copy-relocs
  - From: H . J . Lu
- Re: PATCH for i386: --no-copy-relocs
  - From: Ian Lance Taylor
- Re: PATCH for i386: --no-copy-relocs
  - From: H . J . Lu
- Re: PATCH for i386: --no-copy-relocs
  - From: Ian Lance Taylor

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]