From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20478 invoked by alias); 20 May 2006 01:14:58 -0000 Received: (qmail 20449 invoked by uid 22791); 20 May 2006 01:14:57 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from omta02sl.mx.bigpond.com (HELO omta02sl.mx.bigpond.com) (144.140.93.154) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Sat, 20 May 2006 01:14:54 +0000 Received: from grove.modra.org ([144.136.172.108]) by omta02sl.mx.bigpond.com with ESMTP id <20060520011451.ISZP24931.omta02sl.mx.bigpond.com@grove.modra.org> for ; Sat, 20 May 2006 01:14:51 +0000 Received: by bubble.grove.modra.org (Postfix, from userid 500) id 61CCD1E4187; Sat, 20 May 2006 10:44:51 +0930 (CST) Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 01:32:00 -0000 From: Alan Modra To: PAUL GILLIAM Cc: Mark Kettenis , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [patch] Strange stepping behaviour with ppc32 with secure PLTs Message-ID: <20060520011451.GE22757@bubble.grove.modra.org> References: <1147469935.3672.114.camel@dufur.beaverton.ibm.com> <20060512225044.GA20706@nevyn.them.org> <20060513143141.GB19700@bubble.grove.modra.org> <20060513145829.GA3721@nevyn.them.org> <20060515005619.GC19700@bubble.grove.modra.org> <20060515150854.GA28766@nevyn.them.org> <20060515234620.GG19700@bubble.grove.modra.org> <200605160634.k4G6Y49p009983@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <20060516071833.GH19700@bubble.grove.modra.org> <1148055854.315.5.camel@dufur.beaverton.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1148055854.315.5.camel@dufur.beaverton.ibm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-05/txt/msg00421.txt.bz2 On Fri, May 19, 2006 at 09:24:14AM -0700, PAUL GILLIAM wrote: > Hold the presses! Could the fact that the libc being used does not have > a '.symtab' section be the cause of the problem? For some reason, the > library I was using has a '.dynsym' section, but no '.symtab' section. > I suspect that someone was trying to save some disc space and caused > several problems. > > The routine 'bfd_get_synthetic_symtab' takes both static and dynamic > symbol tables as input. So it's no wonder it's not doing the right > thing if one is missing. No. ppc32 uses the generic _bfd_elf_get_synthetic_symtab, which only uses the dyn syms. The only target to use both sym tables is ppc64, where synthetic syms are handy for disassembly of relocatable object files (which don't have a dynamic sym table). -- Alan Modra IBM OzLabs - Linux Technology Centre