Re: Problems with startup code symbols (Copious warnings)

Frederic RISS
2006-06-20T12:33:24Z

On Tue, 2006-06-20 at 08:21 -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 19, 2006 at 10:15:56AM +0200, Frederic RISS wrote:
> > What about looking at section VMAs? If one loadable section has a VMA of
> > 0 then we can't discard debug info with low_pc == 0. If no section lives
> > at address 0 then low_pc == 0 implies that the relocations for this
> > info couldn't be applied because the code has vanished.
> > I'm sure I missed somethnig in the general case, but I've added
> > something like this as a post-load pass in a target_so_ops I implemented
> > some time ago and it worked well.
>
> The problem is that this only works for binaries which _either_ use
> linkonce sections or code at zero. A binary with both would still not
> work very well.

Of course. But I don't see any non-embedded binary with a section loaded
at NULL. And I don't see much embedded bootcode needing linkonce
sections.

> Is that an improvement? I guess so.

It's certainly better than the current HAS_RELOCS check.