[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Tinycc-devel] Call for testing
From: |
Thomas Preud'homme |
Subject: |
Re: [Tinycc-devel] Call for testing |
Date: |
Fri, 25 Jan 2013 19:07:36 +0100 |
User-agent: |
KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/3.2.0-4-amd64; KDE/4.8.4; x86_64; ; ) |
Le vendredi 25 janvier 2013 18:53:28, Thomas Preud'homme a écrit :
>
> The problem is that tcc, when linking, was copying the type for functions
> symbol (STT_FUNC and STT_GNU_IFUNC) in the resulting executable.
I think I got how it works. The dynamic resolver works in 2 steps. First it
search for the symbol value and then if it's a symbol of STT_GNU_IFUNC type,
it'll call the resulting symbol to get the final symbol value. This is what
happens on the first call when it find the definition in the glibc. The second,
via dlsym, will see get the value from the executable itself since it has
already been resolved. The dynamic resolver will then not call the function as
part of the resolution since the symbol is marked STT_FUNC in the executable.
I shall now be able to find a nice comment but let me know if I'm wrong.
Best regards,
Thomas
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] Call for testing, (continued)
Re: [Tinycc-devel] Call for testing, Thomas Preud'homme, 2013/01/24
Re: [Tinycc-devel] Call for testing, Didier Barvaux, 2013/01/24
Re: [Tinycc-devel] Call for testing, Thomas Preud'homme, 2013/01/25
Re: [Tinycc-devel] Call for testing,
Thomas Preud'homme <=
Re: [Tinycc-devel] Call for testing, grischka, 2013/01/25
Re: [Tinycc-devel] Call for testing, Thomas Preud'homme, 2013/01/25
Re: [Tinycc-devel] Call for testing, Didier Barvaux, 2013/01/26