[llvm-commits] [llvm] [Patch] MCJIT, fix ARM ELF stub relocations

[Kaylor, Andrew]

It appears to me that this will result in the FinalAddress parameter being calculated from Section.Address.  Shouldn't it be calculated from Section.LoadAddress?  That is, rather than passing 'Target' should you be passing 'Section.LoadAddress + Rel.Offset'?

It is my understanding that in the case of local execution Section.Address and Section.LoadAddress will be the same (and so existing tests would pass with the patch you submitted), but that the distinction exists to handle the case of remote JITing.  I think that we may have some clean-up to do to make this work correctly, but it looks like the foundation is more or less in place.

Let me know if I've misunderstood this in some way.

-Andy


From: llvm-commits-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvm-commits-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Danil Malyshev
Sent: Friday, April 06, 2012 5:49 PM
To: llvm-commits at cs.uiuc.edu
Subject: [llvm-commits] [llvm] [Patch] MCJIT, fix ARM ELF stub relocations

Hello everyone,


Attached the patch fixed ARM stub relocations in RuntimeDyldELF.


Regards,
Danil
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/attachments/20120410/93065ff2/attachment.html>