[rtems-tools]rtems-ld issue?

[zhengxiaojun]

在 2023/8/31 13:39, Chris Johns 写道:
> On 31/8/2023 3:12 pm, zhengxiaojun wrote:
>>
>>
>> 在 2023/8/31 6:05, Chris Johns 写道:
>>> On 31/8/2023 12:48 am, zhengxiaojun wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>      I use the latest rtems-tools to generate RAP file, I found the object file
>>>> become too small(elf,2184bytes==>rap,736bytes) and the file loaded failed, error
>>>> message like this "load app.out error:offset past end of file: offset=736
>>>> size=736 error."
>>>
>>> What arch and BSP?
>>>
>>>>      I reverted the rtl-rap.cpp commit( 0ad4aaafc20afcb5aacb7a82b0b3a8150b638975
>>>> linker/rap: Ignore relocation records with no section), the rap file can be
>>>> loaded.
>>>
>>> I think the commit has the wrong ticket id, it should be 4069 ...
>>>
>>> https://devel.rtems.org/ticket/4069
>>>
>>> My guess is the length includes the relocs that have been dropped because they
>>> do not have a symbol section. A reloc without a symbol section cannot be located
>>> because you do not know the section to locate it against.
>>>
>>> Are you able to review the rtems-ld code for the issue?
>>>
>> I found something suspicious, get_relocations(s) return all the count of
>> relocation and write to rap file, but actual count is less, because ignore the
>> reloc with section=0.
> 
> Right, this aligns with my guess. That value should the number written out and
> it should not assume all are written.
> 
>> This issue is similar to ticket #4781, maybe the same.
> 
> Yeah it could. It would be nice if it is.
> 
>> reduce count or write all relocs in rap ? I do not know which is the right
>> solution.
> 
> I am not sure. If relocs are needed then we have to have them and the patch you
> isolated is wrong or needs more understanding to know why it is there. I suspect
> an arch had an issue and this was the solution but that is guess on my part.

I tried to make the length fit the relocs write to rap file, the file 
can not be loaded, it crashed. So the relocs(reloc.symsect == 0) can not 
be ignored, at least in arm.



In addition, I saw a loader complaint "rtl: unsupported section:..." 
about .ARM.attributes， the arm linkcmds always keep it.
Should it be dealt with?


> 
> Chris
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list
> devel at rtems.org
> http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel