On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 9:32 AM, Rich Felker <dal...@libc.org> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 05, 2015 at 06:39:10AM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote: >> On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 3:26 PM, H.J. Lu <hjl.to...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > Protected symbol means that it can't be pre-emptied. It >> > doesn't mean its address won't be external. This is true >> > for pointer to protected function. With copy relocation, >> > address of protected data defined in the shared library may >> > also be external. We only know that for sure at run-time. >> > Here are patches for glibc, binutils and GCC to handle it >> > properly. >> > >> > Any comments? >> >> This is the binutils patch I checked in. It basically reverted >> the change for >> >> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15228 >> >> on x86. Copy relocations against protected symbols should >> work. > > Does it actually work now though? Last I checked gcc was generating > wrong code too -- GOT-relative accesses rather than accessing them > through the GOT. If that's the case, ld has no way to fix the problem. >
You need to apply both my GCC and glibc patches in https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-03/msg00257.html -- H.J.
