On Sun, Dec 27, 2020 at 12:23:48PM +0300, Alexander Monakov wrote:
> On Sat, 26 Dec 2020, Andrew Pinski via Gcc wrote:
>
> > Two things, this should really be on the binutils mailing list rather
> > than the GCC mailing list. Second you can't generate a flat binary
> > which has a GOT as it requires relocations and there is no way to
> > represent relocations in flat binary. So you need to use non PIE or
> > still use elf format.
> > PIE requires the use of the GOT.
>
> You can annotate 'func' in prog.c with __attribute__((visibility("hidden"))),
> then GCC should not use a GOT relocation for the reference. Note that you do
> need to set visibility via the attribute or the pragma, not the command-line
> flag -fvisibility=hidden, because the flag does not affect declarations.
>
> (this is for x86-64; as 32-bit x86 lack eip-relative addressing, GCC uses
> GOT relocation for taking the address anyway; it will work if the linker
> places an "imaginary" empty GOT somewhere, just to have a stable anchor
> against which to resolve GOTOFF relocations)
>
> Please consider filing a bug against binutils on sourceware.org, this looks
> like a QoI issue in the linker: it should emit a diagnostic rather than
> non-sensical code.
>
> Alexander
Thanks for the input Alexander. I've gone ahead and filed
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27119 against binutils.
Cheers,
Rhys
