From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 32176 invoked by alias); 8 Mar 2010 07:23:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 32168 invoked by uid 22791); 8 Mar 2010 07:23:37 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 08 Mar 2010 07:23:33 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF82D2BAB1D; Mon, 8 Mar 2010 02:23:31 -0500 (EST) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id xdwofUKW9wRj; Mon, 8 Mar 2010 02:23:31 -0500 (EST) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54A5E2BAAC3; Mon, 8 Mar 2010 02:23:31 -0500 (EST) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 1C5FDF5894; Mon, 8 Mar 2010 11:23:17 +0400 (RET) Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2010 07:23:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Jan Kratochvil Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [patch] Fix false warning: section .gnu.liblist not found in ... [rediffed] Message-ID: <20100308072317.GE3081@adacore.com> References: <20100213224929.GB27252@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> <20100228231418.GA26404@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100228231418.GA26404@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2010-03/txt/msg00296.txt.bz2 > 2010-03-01 Jan Kratochvil > > * symfile.c (addr_info_make_relative): New variable sect_name, use it. > Do not warn on ".gnu.liblist" and ".gnu.conflict". This looks reasonable. We can go with that at least for now, but I am wondering whether we might want to consider using a complaint instead if more sections like these keep popping up. I have a small request: > + /* These two sections are intentionally loaded into memory from > + the DYNAMIC segment and so they have both SEC_ALLOC and SEC_LOAD > + set in the main executable (not in the library files). They > + are not present in the separate debug info file, though. */ > + > + if (!(strcmp (sect_name, ".gnu.liblist") == 0 > + || strcmp (sect_name, ".gnu.conflict") == 0)) > + warning (_("section %s not found in %s"), sect_name, > + bfd_get_filename (abfd)); > + I was a little confused at first by the comment, because it immediately mentioned "these two sections" without giving an idea of what these sections were. May I suggest maybe something more detailed like so? /* This section does not exist in ABFD, which is normally unexpected and we want to issue a warning. However, the ELF prelinker does create a couple of sections (".gnu.liblist" and ".gnu.conflict") which are marked as loadable (they are loaded in memory from the DYNAMIC segment) and yet are not present in separate debug info files. This is fine, and should not cause a warning. */ -- Joel