Two of the gcc ifunc tests fail for ppc32, due to my pr22374 fix being
a little too enthusiastic in trimming PLT entries. ppc64 doesn't have
the same failures because ppc64_elf_check_relocs happens to set
needs_plt for any ifunc reloc.
PR 23123
PR 22374
* elf32-ppc.c (ppc_elf_adjust_dynamic_symbol): Don't drop plt
relocs for ifuncs.
* elf64-ppc.c (ppc64_elf_adjust_dynamic_symbol): Comment fixes.
+2018-04-27 Alan Modra <amodra@gmail.com>
+
+ PR 23123
+ PR 22374
+ * elf32-ppc.c (ppc_elf_adjust_dynamic_symbol): Don't drop plt
+ relocs for ifuncs.
+ * elf64-ppc.c (ppc64_elf_adjust_dynamic_symbol): Comment fixes.
+
2018-04-26 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* elf64-ppc.c (ppc64_elf_get_synthetic_symtab): Don't consider
&& !readonly_dynrelocs (h))
{
h->pointer_equality_needed = 0;
- /* If we haven't seen a branch reloc then we don't need
- a plt entry. */
- if (!h->needs_plt)
+ /* If we haven't seen a branch reloc and the symbol
+ isn't an ifunc then we don't need a plt entry. */
+ if (!h->needs_plt && h->type != STT_GNU_IFUNC)
h->plt.plist = NULL;
}
else if (!bfd_link_pic (info))
if (!readonly_dynrelocs (h))
{
h->pointer_equality_needed = 0;
- /* If we haven't seen a branch reloc then we don't need
- a plt entry. */
+ /* If we haven't seen a branch reloc and the symbol
+ isn't an ifunc then we don't need a plt entry. */
if (!h->needs_plt)
h->plt.plist = NULL;
}
else if (!h->needs_plt
&& !readonly_dynrelocs (h))
{
- /* If we haven't seen a branch reloc then we don't need a
- plt entry. */
+ /* If we haven't seen a branch reloc and the symbol isn't an
+ ifunc then we don't need a plt entry. */
h->plt.plist = NULL;
h->pointer_equality_needed = 0;
return TRUE;