https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22452
--- Comment #12 from Mark Wielaard <mark at klomp dot org> --- (In reply to H. Brueckner from comment #10) > (In reply to Mark Wielaard from comment #9) > > But the output does confirm what I feared. The R_390_PC32 .rela.eh_frame > > relocations are not "simple". They are load based. > > So now it comes to that point I have feared, as it looks like the libdw just > performs "simple" relocations. Your comment and the ebl_reloc_simple_type() > call in libdwfl/relocate.c proofs that. Anyhow, do you plan to extend the > relocation code to support more complex relocations tool? > > > It might not be too hard to add support for those. > > What needs to be done / is necessary for that? We would need to extend ebl_reloc_simple_type, or add a new ebl backend hook, that signals a relocation uses the load address. Then in libdwfl/relocate.c use that to adjust the value to include the load address that libdwfl assigns to the section (given by struct dwfl_relocation start). This is similar to what arch/s390/kernel/module.c in the kernel does, but slightly more complicated because we want it to work "offline" cross architecture. This would be helpful in general for any ET_REL file for which we want to inspect the .eh_frame section CFI data. But since this is just for the kernel modules at the moment I would wait with implementing it till you have experimented with adjusting the kernel build like suggested in comment #11. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
