Ian Lance Taylor ianlancetaylor@gmail.com
Mon Jun 1 20:07:00 GMT 2009

• Previous message (by thread): Proposal for STT_GNU_IFUNC and R_*_IRELATIVE
• Next message (by thread): Proposal for STT_GNU_IFUNC and R_*_IRELATIVE
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

---

"H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com> writes:

> R_*_IRELATIVE
>
>       This relocation is similar to R_*_RELATIVE except that the
>       value used in this relocation is the program address returned
>       by the function, which takes no arguments, at the address of
>       the result of the corresponding R_*_RELATIVE relocation.
>
>       The purpose of this relocation to avoid name lookup for locally
>       defined STT_GNU_IFUNC symbols at load-time.

How is the "corresponding R_*_RELATIVE relocation" determined?

Ian

---

• Previous message (by thread): Proposal for STT_GNU_IFUNC and R_*_IRELATIVE
• Next message (by thread): Proposal for STT_GNU_IFUNC and R_*_IRELATIVE
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

---

More information about the Binutils mailing list