Need ld.so help
Gary Thomas
gdt at linuxppc.org
Sun Dec 27 23:05:22 EST 1998
On 27-Dec-98 Dan Malek wrote:
>
> I discovered the problem I am having with the embedded 8xx
> processors and cache is that there are several assumptions
> about cache block size in various functions. The 8xx processors
> have a 4 word (16 byte) cache line while other PPCs have
> a 8 word line. This causes problems when trying to flush and
> invalidate caches.
>
> One place this is done is dynamic linking functions of ld.so,
> where it is assumed a cache line is 8 words. Unfortunately,
> I have been unable to build ld.so from the glibc SRPM. I am
> using the 961212-1h SRPM from the linuxppc.org server, and
> the appropriate egcs and binutils. All of the other libraries
> I build from this SRPM are fine. From looking at the RPM of
> the same version, all of the resulting *.so files appear to be
> nearly identical, except for ld.so which is much larger than
> found in the RPM.
>
> The details....I have tracked it down to the elf_get_dynamic_info()
> function, called from _dl_start(). The failure occurs following
> the 'while' loop. It appears info[DT_RELA] is OK, or at least
> not NULL. However, info[DT_RELAENT] is NULL, causing the
> program to segfault at this point.
>
> I don't understand enough about the libraries to know where to
> look from here, so I need some help :-)
>
> Oh yeah, the SRPM didn't build quite right. I had to hand patch
> stdlib/exit.c.....
>
I'm confused. Are all of these problems attributable to the cache-line
size stuff? Or are there other problems?
I [obviously] build the libraries directly from the SRPMS, so I'd like
to understand what your problems are.
Which software pieces are you running?
EGCS?
BINUTILS?
GLIBC?
Kernel?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gary Thomas |
email: gdt at linuxppc.org | "Fine wine is a necessity of
... opinions expressed here are mine | life for me"
and no one else would claim them! |
| Thomas Jefferson
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[ This message was sent via the linuxppc-dev mailing list. Replies are ]]
[[ not forced back to the list, so be sure to Cc linuxppc-dev if your ]]
[[ reply is of general interest. To unsubscribe from linuxppc-dev, send ]]
[[ the message 'unsubscribe' to linuxppc-dev-request at lists.linuxppc.org ]]
More information about the Linuxppc-dev
mailing list