On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 11:09 AM, Kenneth Johansson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >
> > I have run u-boot with everything compiled with -mrelocatable and normal > relocation fixup code removed so I know it works fine. So consider it > proven. But since it apparently is a problem in some situation the best > is probably to make it a configuration option. > > >From what I saw in my limited experiment, there is no code (as in CPU instructions) generated by gcc, just a data section containing offsets. Maybe the linker is supposed to add some code to the startup file to handle that section in case it is invoked with -mrelocatable (on't know if it would recognize this an option) or detects .fixup section in the .o files being linked. It is a mute point for embedded development anyways. I *think* the only thing missing is a simple function to scan the .fixup table and fix the pointers after relocation. cheers, /vb > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge > Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes > Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world > http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/ > _______________________________________________ > U-Boot-Users mailing list > U-Boot-Users@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/u-boot-users > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/ _______________________________________________ U-Boot-Users mailing list U-Boot-Users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/u-boot-users
