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]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: Why does ELF/ppc expect .plt NOBITS?

From: "H. J. Lu" <hjl at lucon dot org>
To: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
Cc: binutils at sources dot redhat dot com, amodra at bigpond dot net dot au
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2003 12:53:10 -0700
Subject: Re: Why does ELF/ppc expect .plt NOBITS?
References: <20030724190726.GA24671@lucon.org> <20030724191357.GK20507@sunsite.ms.mff.cuni.cz> <20030724194904.GA12185@lucon.org>

On Thu, Jul 24, 2003 at 12:49:04PM -0700, H. J. Lu wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 24, 2003 at 09:13:57PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 24, 2003 at 12:07:26PM -0700, H. J. Lu wrote:
> > > Hi Alan,
> > > 
> > > ld-powerpc tests expect the .plt section is SHT_NOBITS. Any particular
> > > reason for that?
> > 
> > Because ppc and ppc64 .plt sections are SHT_NOBITS as per their psABI?
> > 
> 
> Let me guess. ppc and ppc64 psABIs also want .sbss to be SHT_PROGBITS?
> 
> 

Where can I get the current ppc and ppc64 psABI? The ppc psABI I have
says .plt is SHT_PROGBITS and .sbss is SHT_NOBITS.


H.J.

Follow-Ups:
- PATCH: Fix .sbss for ELF/ppc64 (Re: Why does ELF/ppc expect .plt NOBITS?)
  - From: H. J. Lu

References:
- Why does ELF/ppc expect .plt NOBITS?
  - From: H. J. Lu
- Re: Why does ELF/ppc expect .plt NOBITS?
  - From: Jakub Jelinek
- Re: Why does ELF/ppc expect .plt NOBITS?
  - From: H. J. Lu

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