On Wed, 12 Dec 2018 at 01:24, Gao, Liming wrote:
>
> That's good. Reviewed-by: Liming Gao
>
Thanks all
Pushed as e07092edca84..0d68ce514b92
> >-Original Message-
> >From: Ard Biesheuvel [mailto:ard.biesheu...@linaro.org]
> >Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2018 9:46 PM
> >To: Gao, Liming
That's good. Reviewed-by: Liming Gao
>-Original Message-
>From: Ard Biesheuvel [mailto:ard.biesheu...@linaro.org]
>Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2018 9:46 PM
>To: Gao, Liming
>Cc: Leif Lindholm ; edk2-devel@lists.01.org; Laszlo
>Ersek ; Feng, Bob C
>Subject: Re: [PATCH] BaseTools/GenFw
On 12/11/18 10:37, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> We currently permit R_ARM_GOT_PREL relocations in the ELF32 conversion
> routines, under the assumption that relative relocations are fine as
> long as the section layout is the same between ELF and PE/COFF.
>
> However, as is the case with any proxy
On Tue, 11 Dec 2018 at 14:40, Gao, Liming wrote:
>
> Ard:
> With this change, GenFw will report what error message if ELF image has
> R_ARM_GOT_PREL relocations.
>
Numerous occurrences of
GenFw: ERROR 3000: Invalid
WriteSections ():
Ard:
With this change, GenFw will report what error message if ELF image has
R_ARM_GOT_PREL relocations.
Thanks
Liming
> -Original Message-
> From: Ard Biesheuvel [mailto:ard.biesheu...@linaro.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2018 7:21 PM
> To: Leif Lindholm
> Cc:
On Tue, 11 Dec 2018 at 12:19, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>
> On Tue, 11 Dec 2018 at 10:53, Leif Lindholm wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 10:37:15AM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> > > We currently permit R_ARM_GOT_PREL relocations in the ELF32 conversion
> > > routines, under the assumption
On Tue, 11 Dec 2018 at 10:53, Leif Lindholm wrote:
>
> On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 10:37:15AM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> > We currently permit R_ARM_GOT_PREL relocations in the ELF32 conversion
> > routines, under the assumption that relative relocations are fine as
> > long as the section layout
On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 10:37:15AM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> We currently permit R_ARM_GOT_PREL relocations in the ELF32 conversion
> routines, under the assumption that relative relocations are fine as
> long as the section layout is the same between ELF and PE/COFF.
>
> However, as is the
We currently permit R_ARM_GOT_PREL relocations in the ELF32 conversion
routines, under the assumption that relative relocations are fine as
long as the section layout is the same between ELF and PE/COFF.
However, as is the case with any proxy generating relocation, it is
up to the linker to emit
9 matches
Mail list logo
