From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9734 invoked by alias); 6 Jan 2012 20:09:51 -0000 Received: (qmail 9723 invoked by uid 22791); 6 Jan 2012 20:09:48 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from relay1.mentorg.com (HELO relay1.mentorg.com) (192.94.38.131) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 06 Jan 2012 20:09:32 +0000 Received: from nat-ies.mentorg.com ([192.94.31.2] helo=EU1-MAIL.mgc.mentorg.com) by relay1.mentorg.com with esmtp id 1RjG6T-0006bM-LX from joseph_myers@mentor.com ; Fri, 06 Jan 2012 12:09:29 -0800 Received: from digraph.polyomino.org.uk ([172.16.63.104]) by EU1-MAIL.mgc.mentorg.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Fri, 6 Jan 2012 20:09:27 +0000 Received: from jsm28 (helo=localhost) by digraph.polyomino.org.uk with local-esmtp (Exim 4.74) (envelope-from ) id 1RjG6Q-0006uh-SC; Fri, 06 Jan 2012 20:09:26 +0000 Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2012 20:09:00 -0000 From: "Joseph S. Myers" To: Michael Eager cc: gdb@sourceware.org, Alan Modra Subject: Re: PowerPC SecurePLT - stepping into library function In-Reply-To: <4F075159.5090508@eagerm.com> Message-ID: References: <4F075159.5090508@eagerm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2012-01/txt/msg00020.txt.bz2 On Fri, 6 Jan 2012, Michael Eager wrote: > It seems that the best way to fix this would be to create > a new OSABI sniffer for SecurePLT which identifies that > the executable was compiled with -msecurePLT. One issue > is how to identify these programs. The Power Arch 32-bit ABI > (Sect 5.2.5.2, note at end) says that these will have > R_PPC_REL16 relocations. I don't see any of these relocs. That's about relocatable objects, i.e. static relocations in .o files, not dynamic relocations in executables and shared libraries. > Is there any possibility of a chimera: an executable compiled > using Secure PLT linking to libraries which use the old style > PLT? Or vice-versa? I'm assuming that this cannot happen. As far as I know that ought to work. -- Joseph S. Myers joseph@codesourcery.com