This is the mail archive of the libc-hacker@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the glibc project.

Note that libc-hacker is a closed list. You may look at the archives of this list, but subscription and posting are not open.

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: TLS support for SH

From: kaz Kojima <kkojima at rr dot iij4u dot or dot jp>
To: libc-hacker at sources dot redhat dot com
Cc: aoliva at redhat dot com
Date: Sat, 13 Apr 2002 12:42:46 +0900
Subject: Re: TLS support for SH
References: <oru1qgl2h5.fsf@free.redhat.lsd.ic.unicamp.br>

Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@redhat.com> wrote:
>> +#define	R_SH_TLS_GD_32		128
>> +#define	R_SH_TLS_LD_32		129
>> +#define	R_SH_TLS_LDO_32		130
>> +#define	R_SH_TLS_IE_32		131
>> +#define	R_SH_TLS_LE_32		132
>> +#define	R_SH_TLS_DTPMOD32	133
>> +#define	R_SH_TLS_DTPOFF32	134
>> +#define	R_SH_TLS_TPOFF32	135
>> +#define	R_SH_TLS_GD_MOV		136
>> +#define	R_SH_TLS_GD_CALLMOV	137
>> +#define	R_SH_TLS_LDM_MOV	138
>> +#define	R_SH_TLS_LDO_MOV	139
>> +#define	R_SH_TLS_LD_CALLMOV	140
>> +#define	R_SH_TLS_IE_MOV		141
>> +#define	R_SH_TLS_LE_MOV		142
>
> These relocation numbers are already taken in the Object File (ELF)
> Specification published by Hitachi in 1996.

Hmm... We can't use these numbers if they will be used in GNU
with the original meaning given by that specification.
Alex, can you please recommend the new relocation numbers?
Should we consider sh64 case?

	kaz

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