search for: et_rel

Hi all, I've put this email in a different thread, although it is quite similar to some of the threads on tombstoning etc, with similar underlying structural issues. Whilst prototyping my fragmented DWARF idea for GC-ing DWARF sections properly, I ran into an object in the game code I was using as my input where a v4 .debug_loc section had a location description that looked something like

...type obj with -pie option? I'm OK if I have to link twice, first output DYN and then covert to EXEC in some way. Could you give some link command examples on it? lld\ELF\Writer.cpp static uint16_t getELFType() { if (Config->Pic) return ET_DYN; if (Config->Relocatable) return ET_REL; return ET_EXEC; } Thanks Steven -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20190123/3d35f540/attachment.html>

...I would have to ask you why as they are not normally loaded into target memory? You are right, debug sections aren't normally loaded into the memory together with the sections needed for running. However, I am mostly focusing on the (lightweight) ELF injection of the relocable ELF objects (ET_REL), and loading them into the memory as a whole, bypassing file, is often the easiest way of working with them. When debug info is needed, it has to be loaded into memory by debugging tools anyway. And it has to be relocated, so debugging tools have then to make sure they are placed into the lowe...

...k about various > index spaces as virtual address spaces, but not all address-space-oriented > assumptions apply. I can see why you would want your own format for distribution. My question was really about using ELF for the .o files. > It would also be possible for WebAssembly to use ELF ET_REL files just for > linking, however telling LLVM and other tools to target ELF tends to lead > them to assume that the final output is ELF and rely on ELF-specific > features. Things like "the dynamic linker implements copy relocations"? Cheers, Rafael

ELF module of type ET_REL (Relocable module), generated by LLVM, always has some R_X86_64_32 in debug information sections. This happens with Reloc models Default,Static,PIC_ and with CodeModel set to Large. What is the way to prevent R_X86_64_32 ELF from ever appearing in ELF? Yuri

Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com> writes: > On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 11:12 AM, Rafael Avila de Espindola < > rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote: > >> Sam Clegg via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> writes: >> >> >> Can you elaborate on semantically what the linker is actually doing for >> >> wasm? >> > >> >

Since updating to 6.3-RELEASE on two machines I see this message a lot. It is printed whenever a kernel module is loaded. The modules load OK. Nothing special or different about them. It seems to be harmless, but any idea why it's started happening since the release? Cheers BMS

...ot all >> > address-space-oriented >> > assumptions apply. >> >> I can see why you would want your own format for distribution. My >> question was really about using ELF for the .o files. >> >> > It would also be possible for WebAssembly to use ELF ET_REL files just >> > for >> > linking, however telling LLVM and other tools to target ELF tends to >> > lead >> > them to assume that the final output is ELF and rely on ELF-specific >> > features. >> >> Things like "the dynamic linker implem...

On 04/27/2013 08:07 AM, Yuri wrote: > ELF module of type ET_REL (Relocable module), generated by LLVM, > always has some R_X86_64_32 in debug information sections. > This happens with Reloc models Default,Static,PIC_ and with CodeModel > set to Large. > > What is the way to prevent R_X86_64_32 ELF from ever appearing in ELF? Hi Yuri, why d...

The size of an address on the target machine in the 32-bit DWARF format is NOT restricted to 32-bits. The size of an address on the target machine is specified in the DWARF table headers. For example, in the DWARF-3 Specification, section 7.5.1, the unit_length field is used to specify whether the DWARF format is 32-bit or 64-bit (as well as defining the length of the table). However the

On 04/29/2013 09:12, Keith Walker wrote: > You only need to go to 64-bit DWARF when your debugging information becomes > too large to fit in 32-bit DWARF tables. I am not sure if this is true. Currently R_X86_64_32 EL relocations are issued for DWARF-32 debug info sections. This is because the size of address in DWARF-32 is only 32-bits, according to the above mentioned specification.

2012/1/23 Bendersky, Eli <eli.bendersky at intel.com>: > Hi, > > I would like to examine the implications you mention in more detail. > Thank you! > (1) Symbol address > According to the ELF standard, in a symbol table entry st_value means: "In relocatable files, st_value holds a section offset for a defined symbol. That is, > st_value is an offset from the