Re: R_SPARC_13

[Richard Mortimer <richm@oldelvet.org.uk>]

On 18/01/2011 00:37, David Miller wrote:
> From: Richard Mortimer<richm@oldelvet.org.uk>
> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2011 23:34:03 +0000
>
>> I guess that points towards the binutils linker not doing the correct
>> thing.
>
> Ok, it is in fact doing the correct thing.
>
> I'm really surprised we never hit this before in all of these years
> :-) I guess we've simply never hit this kind of expression in a module
> before.
>
> The issue is that modules aren't a "final link", it's really more like
> an intermediate partial link.
>
> So we do end up seeing the R_SPARC_LO10 + R_SPARC_13 sequences in the
> final module object.
>
> Therefore, we really should handle R_SPARC_13 in the sparc module loader.
>
> Richard, I want you to get full credit for this since you did all of
> the dirty work :-) Would you please cons up a formal patch with commit
> message and signoff for this and I'll push it around?
>
> Thanks a lot!

Will do tomorrow. I'll dust off my git tree.

Regards

Richard