Commit Graph

4 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Rui Ueyama afa35a2a37 Remove Writer::ensureBss().
Previously, we created a .bss section when needed. We had a function
ensureBss() for that purpose. Turned out that was error-prone
because it was easy to forget to call that function before accessing
the .bss section.

This patch always make the BSS section. The section is added to the
output when it's not empty.

llvm-svn: 270527
2016-05-24 03:16:51 +00:00
Rui Ueyama 98843087cb Reject zero-sized symbols when creating copy relocations.
Copy relocations are relocations to copy data from DSOs to
executable's .bss segment at runtime. It doesn't make sense to
create such relocations for zero-sized symbols.

GNU linkers don't agree with each other. ld rejects such
relocation/symbol pair. gold don't reject that but do not create
copy relocations as well.  I took the former approach because
I don't think the latter is what user wants.

llvm-svn: 270525
2016-05-24 02:37:40 +00:00
Rafael Espindola 66434562e7 Fix copy relocations in pie.
We were creating the copy relocations just fine, but then thinking that
the .bss position could be preempted and creating a dynamic relocation
to it, which would crash at runtime since that memory is read only.

llvm-svn: 268668
2016-05-05 19:41:49 +00:00
Simon Atanasyan 2615c3846f [ELF] Do not skip relocation scanning checking if the symbol gets dynamic COPY relocation already
It is possible that the same symbol referenced by two kinds of
relocations at the same time. The first type requires say GOT entry
creation, the second type requires dynamic copy relocation. For MIPS
targets they might be R_MIPS_GOT16 and R_MIPS_HI16 relocations. For X86
target they might be R_386_GOT32 and R_386_32 respectively.

Now LLD never creates GOT entry for a symbol if this symbol already has
related copy relocation. This patch solves this problem.

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D18862

llvm-svn: 265910
2016-04-10 21:48:55 +00:00