[LLVMdev] Some thought on handling ELF shared libraries in lld

[Dave Bozier]

Sounds reasonable. The sstrip tool that performs stripping of the
section header does state that this makes shared libraries unsuitable
for static linking. From the documentation:

> A shared-object library stripped in this fashion will still be usable by the dynamic linker, but not by the static linker.

That said, it should be technically possible to statically link a
shared library with no section header table if we chose to support
that use case. Can't you use the symbol indices of dynamic relocations
to achieve this instead of counting the number of symbols?

On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 1:46 PM, Rafael Espíndola
<rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote:
> Most ELF shared libraries can be sliced in two ways. One is following
> the information in the program headers (e_phoff). The other is
> following the information in the section headers (e_shoff).
>
> Regular relocatable objects only have the section header.
>
> At runtime, the dynamic linker only uses the program headers. In fact,
> the section headers is optional.
>
> When given a shared library, how should the static linker handle it?
>
> Note that, unlike the dynamic linker, the static one has to find all
> the defined symbol is a shared library. It is not enough to just look
> up the currently undefined symbols. To see that, consider
>
> $ cat test.c
> void f(void) { }
> $ cat test2.c
> void f(void);
> void g(void) {
>   f();
> }
>
> $ clang -c test.c test2.c -fPIC
> $ clang -shared test.o -o test.so
> $ rm -f test.a
> $ ar rc test.a test.o
> $ clang test.so test2.o test.a -o t.so -Wl,-t -shared
> $ clang         test2.o test.a -o t.so -Wl,-t -shared
>
> The second link will include the archive member, the first one will not.
>
> It is tempting to use the program headers in the static linker. Doing
> so would let us support linking with shared libraries with no section
> headers, but there are a few issues:
>
> * The intention of the spec seems to be for everything static to use
> the section headers and everything dynamic to use the program headers.
> * Finding the number of symbols with the program header in a
> traditional ELF file is a hack. One has to read the nchain field of
> the hash table.
> * It doesn't seem even possible to find that information in files
> using the newer gnu hash format
> (https://blogs.oracle.com/ali/entry/gnu_hash_elf_sections).
>
> Given that, it looks like we should use the sections. For what it is
> worth, it looks like that is what every other ELF linker does.
>
> Cheers,
> Rafael
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev