https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23611
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Burgess <andrew.burgess at embecosm dot com> ---
I think that you are correct, these two sections don't behave like other
relocation sections. The answer, I suspect is this code in elf.c:
/* If this reloc section does not use the main symbol table we
don't treat it as a reloc section. BFD can't adequately
represent such a section, so at least for now, we don't
try. We just present it as a normal section. We also
can't use it as a reloc section if it points to the null
section, an invalid section, another reloc section, or its
sh_link points to the null section. */
if (hdr->sh_link != elf_onesymtab (abfd)
|| hdr->sh_link == SHN_UNDEF
|| hdr->sh_info == SHN_UNDEF
|| hdr->sh_info >= num_sec
|| elf_elfsections (abfd)[hdr->sh_info]->sh_type == SHT_REL
|| elf_elfsections (abfd)[hdr->sh_info]->sh_type == SHT_RELA)
{
ret = _bfd_elf_make_section_from_shdr (abfd, hdr, name,
shindex);
goto success;
}
The upshot is that some relocation sections are actually going to appear as
normal sections within the bfd's section list.
I think your patch is probably the right solution.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
_______________________________________________
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
