Hi Vijay,
but Im unsure about PT_TLS segment consisting only of .tbss section like in above case.
Why ? It seems reasonable to me.
when objcopy does consider such a segment to be part of LOAD, when assigning offsets things seem to be going wrong First issue we encounter. objcopy: stq0GBq2: section `.data' can't be allocated in segment 0 LOAD: .tbss .data .bss .sdata objcopy: stq0GBq2: section `.bss' can't be allocated in segment 0 LOAD: .tbss .data .bss .sdata second issue the image sizes are overblown du -sh a.out 34G a.out
>
all of this because lld seems to not emit LMA with a proper offset ie its LMA is just VMA not LMA+Offset.
Right. I think that this means that the problem lies with lld. (When I try the same sequence of commands using the ld.bfd everything works...)
Is it expected that objcopy considers PT_TLS segment consisting only of tbss to be part of LOAD, since tbss is a special section I assumed it should have been dealt with differently ie not part of LOAD. if so could you explain reasoning behind this.
AH - I think that I understand your question now. The reason is that the ELF_SECTION_IN_SEGMENT_1 macro is meant to check if a section-to-segment assignment is potentially valid, but not to enforce a specific assignment policy. Thus it is possible for a section of type SHF_TLS to be placed into a PT_LOAD segment - there are other ways for the loader to determine that the segment contains some thread local data - it is just not very intuitive. At least that is how I see it. I think that you have come across a case where the BFD library's section placement heuristics do not work correctly. Although the circumstances are rather strange. Please feel free to file a bug report about the problem, including your reproducer, and we can investigate further. Cheers Nick
