search for: r_mips_hi16

On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 9:28 AM, Rui Ueyama <ruiu at google.com> wrote: > On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 10:13 PM, Simon Atanasyan <simon at atanasyan.com> > wrote: >> >> In case of MIPS O32 ABI we have to find a matching R_MIPS_LO16 >> relocation to calculate R_MIPS_HI16 one because R_MIPS_HI16 uses >> combined addend (AHI << 16) + (short)ALO where AHI is original >> R_MIPS_HI16 addend and ALO is addend of the matching R_MIPS_LO16 >> relocation [1]. There are two methods to do matching and R_MIPS_HI16 >> calculation. >> >>...

Hi, I am working on support R_MIPS_HI16 / R_MIPS_LO16 in the new LLD and have a couple of questions. == Q1 In case of MIPS O32 ABI we have to find a matching R_MIPS_LO16 relocation to calculate R_MIPS_HI16 one because R_MIPS_HI16 uses combined addend (AHI << 16) + (short)ALO where AHI is original R_MIPS_HI16 addend and ALO is adde...

...i Ueyama <ruiu at google.com> wrote: >> > On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 10:13 PM, Simon Atanasyan <simon at atanasyan.com> >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> In case of MIPS O32 ABI we have to find a matching R_MIPS_LO16 >> >> relocation to calculate R_MIPS_HI16 one because R_MIPS_HI16 uses >> >> combined addend (AHI << 16) + (short)ALO where AHI is original >> >> R_MIPS_HI16 addend and ALO is addend of the matching R_MIPS_LO16 >> >> relocation [1]. There are two methods to do matching and R_MIPS_HI16 >> >...

...O16 relocations separately and produce the same relocation result? Do we > have to pair them up before applying relocations? The correct formula for the combined addend is (AHI << 16) + (short)ALO. So the combined addend depends on both AHI and ALO addends, therefore ALO affects result of R_MIPS_HI16 relocation. Current version of bfd GNU linker looks up R_MIPS_LO16 relocation each time it needs to calculate R_MIPS_HI16 relocation. It uses `mips_elf_add_lo16_rel_addend` function for that (https://goo.gl/P7nb76). -- Simon Atanasyan

What would be the best way to sort relocation entries before they are written out in ELFObjectWriter::WriteRelocationsFragment? According to the Mips ABI documents I have, there are certain restrictions on the order relocations appear in the table (e.g. R_MIPS_HI16 and R_MIPS_GOT16 must be followed immediately by a R_MIPS_LO16). When I enable post RA scheduling, some of the restrictions are violated in the generated object code, which results in incorrect relocation values generated by the linker. I am considering imitating what gas does in function mips_fro...

...om> wrote: > What would be the best way to sort relocation entries before they are > written out in ELFObjectWriter::WriteRelocationsFragment? > > According to the Mips ABI documents I have, there are certain > restrictions on the order relocations appear in the table (e.g. > R_MIPS_HI16 and R_MIPS_GOT16 must be followed immediately by a > R_MIPS_LO16). When I enable post RA scheduling, some of the > restrictions are violated in the generated object code, which results > in incorrect relocation values generated by the linker. > > I am considering imitating what gas...

...What would be the best way to sort relocation entries before they are >> written out in ELFObjectWriter::WriteRelocationsFragment? >> >> According to the Mips ABI documents I have, there are certain >> restrictions on the order relocations appear in the table (e.g. >> R_MIPS_HI16 and R_MIPS_GOT16 must be followed immediately by a >> R_MIPS_LO16). When I enable post RA scheduling, some of the >> restrictions are violated in the generated object code, which results >> in incorrect relocation values generated by the linker. >> >> I am considering...

...est way to sort relocation entries before they are >>> written out in ELFObjectWriter::WriteRelocationsFragment? >>> >>> According to the Mips ABI documents I have, there are certain >>> restrictions on the order relocations appear in the table (e.g. >>> R_MIPS_HI16 and R_MIPS_GOT16 must be followed immediately by a >>> R_MIPS_LO16). When I enable post RA scheduling, some of the >>> restrictions are violated in the generated object code, which results >>> in incorrect relocation values generated by the linker. >>> >>&g...

...ation entries before they are >>>> written out in ELFObjectWriter::WriteRelocationsFragment? >>>> >>>> According to the Mips ABI documents I have, there are certain >>>> restrictions on the order relocations appear in the table (e.g. >>>> R_MIPS_HI16 and R_MIPS_GOT16 must be followed immediately by a >>>> R_MIPS_LO16). When I enable post RA scheduling, some of the >>>> restrictions are violated in the generated object code, which results >>>> in incorrect relocation values generated by the linker. >>&gt...

With pleasure we announce the release of tinc version 1.1pre10. Here is a summary of the changes: * Added a benchmark tool (sptps_speed) for the new protocol. * Fixed a crash when using Name = $HOST while $HOST is not set. * Use AES-256-GCM for the new protocol. * Updated support for Solaris. * Allow running tincd without a private ECDSA key present when ExperimentalProtocol is not

With pleasure we announce the release of tinc version 1.1pre10. Here is a summary of the changes: * Added a benchmark tool (sptps_speed) for the new protocol. * Fixed a crash when using Name = $HOST while $HOST is not set. * Use AES-256-GCM for the new protocol. * Updated support for Solaris. * Allow running tincd without a private ECDSA key present when ExperimentalProtocol is not

...e they are >>>>> written out in ELFObjectWriter::WriteRelocationsFragment? >>>>> >>>>> According to the Mips ABI documents I have, there are certain >>>>> restrictions on the order relocations appear in the table (e.g. >>>>> R_MIPS_HI16 and R_MIPS_GOT16 must be followed immediately by a >>>>> R_MIPS_LO16). When I enable post RA scheduling, some of the >>>>> restrictions are violated in the generated object code, which results >>>>> in incorrect relocation values generated by the linker....

...t;>>> written out in ELFObjectWriter::WriteRelocationsFragment? >>>>>> >>>>>> According to the Mips ABI documents I have, there are certain >>>>>> restrictions on the order relocations appear in the table (e.g. >>>>>> R_MIPS_HI16 and R_MIPS_GOT16 must be followed immediately by a >>>>>> R_MIPS_LO16). When I enable post RA scheduling, some of the >>>>>> restrictions are violated in the generated object code, which results >>>>>> in incorrect relocation values generated by...