After D66007/r369262, if the control flow reaches `if (sym.isUndefined())`, we know:
* The relocation is not a link-time constant => symbol is preemptable => Undefined or SharedSymbol
* Not an undef weak.
* -no-pie.
* The symbol type is neither STT_OBJECT nor STT_FUNC.
ld.lld --export-dynamic --unresolved-symbols=ignore-all %t.o can satisfy
these conditions. Delete the isUndefined() test so that we error
`symbol '...' has no type`, because we don't know the type to make the
decision to create copy relocation/canonical PLT.
llvm-svn: 369271
This splits relocation processing in two steps.
First, analyze what needs to be done at the relocation spot. This can
be a constant (non preemptible symbol, relative got reference, etc) or
require a dynamic relocation. At this step we also consider creating
copy relocations.
Once that is done we decide if we need a got or a plt entry.
The code is simpler IMHO. For example:
- There is a single call to isPicRel since the logic is not split
among adjustExpr and the caller.
- R_MIPS_GOTREL is simple to handle now.
- The tracking of what is preemptible or not is much simpler now.
This also fixes a regression with symbols being both in a got and copy
relocated. They had regressed in r268668 and r268149.
The other test changes are because of error messages changes or the
order of two relocations in the output.
llvm-svn: 322047
This makes adjustExpr a bit simpler too IMHO.
It seems that some of the complication around relocation processing
is that we are trying to create copy relocations too early. It seems
we could handle a few simple cases first and continue.
llvm-svn: 321507
If a relocation cannot be implemented by the dynamic linker and the
section is rw, allow creating a plt entry to use as the function
address as if the section was ro.
This matches bfd and gold. It also matches our behavior with -z
notext.
llvm-svn: 321430
Previously we handled this option implicitly, only
for infering unresolved symbols handling policy.
ld man says: "--noinhibit-exec Retain the executable
output file whenever it is still usable",
and we may want to handle other cases too.
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D35793
llvm-svn: 309091
Previous error message style:
error: /home/alice/src/bar.c:12: relocation R_X86_64_PLT32 cannot refer to absolute symbol 'answer' defined in /home/alice/src/foo.o
New error message style:
error: relocation R_X86_64_PLT32 cannot refer to absolute symbol: foo
>>> defined in /home/alice/src/foo.o
>>> referenced by bar.c:12 (/home/alice/src/bar.c:12)
>>> /home/alice/src/bar.o:(.text+0x1)
llvm-svn: 299390
Previously message told us that relocations could
not be used when making shared object. That was
correct because message could appear (and it is expected)
when we linked executable.
Message should have being changed to something
that says we can't use a subset of relocations against shared
symbols.
Patch fixes the text.
llvm-svn: 272478
Fangrui Song