support decoding the relocation entries of loader section of xcoff for llvm-readobj
https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/aix/7.2?topic=formats-xcoff-object-file-format#XCOFF__vra3i31ejbau
Differential D136787
[XCOFF] Decode the relocation entries of loader section of xcoff for llvm-readobj DiggerLin on Oct 26 2022, 1:49 PM. Authored by
Details support decoding the relocation entries of loader section of xcoff for llvm-readobj https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/aix/7.2?topic=formats-xcoff-object-file-format#XCOFF__vra3i31ejbau
Diff Detail
Unit Tests
Event Timeline
Comment Actions Essentially looks reasonable to me, although I haven't verified that all the call paths are properly covered by tests. @Esme or another XCOFF developer should take a look at this before landing it. FYI, my last day working before Christmas is next Friday, and I may have limited reviewing time next week. I won't be back and able to review things further after that until late January. Comment Actions Feel sorry that i'm just getting started to review this patch. vaddr section type symbol 20000294 2 POS .data 2000029c 2 POS 0 Only when --expand-relocs is specified, we print relocations like the format in this patch. @jhenderson What do you think?
Comment Actions Btw. Do you have any plans to implement an option like "--loader-section" to embrace all this loader section related information? Comment Actions Yes, after I have a plan to implement the option "--loader-section" and I also have plan to reimplement of "[llvm-readobj][XCOFF] Add support for --needed-libs option." which will print the needed-libs in the "loader sections" Comment Actions Some nits, but the idea of implementing expand relocs behaviour here seems reasonable to me. This will likely be my last post on this review until I'm back at the end of January. Feel free to not wait any further on me.
Comment Actions
This comment was removed by Esme.
|
I noticed an extra field of l_value for Loader Section Relocation Table Entry Structure specified by the doc, is it also a doc error?