| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
|---|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
this code dates back to the original commit of the sh port, with no
real clue as to how the bug was introduced. it looks like it was
written to assume the return address was pushed to the stack like on
x86, rather than arriving in the pr special register.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
the braf instruction's destination register is an offset from the
address of the braf instruction plus 4 (or equivalently, the address
of the next instruction after the delay slot). the code for dlsym was
incorrectly computing the offset to pass using the address of the
delay slot itself. in other places, a label was placed after the delay
slot, but I find this confusing. putting the label on the branch
instruction itself, and manually adding 4, makes it more clear which
branch the offset in the constant pool goes with.
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
even hidden functions need @PLT symbol references; otherwise an
absolute address is produced instead of a PC-relative one.
|
| | |
|
|
|
linux, gcc, etc. all use "sh" as the name for the superh arch. there
was already some inconsistency internally in musl: the dynamic linker
was searching for "ld-musl-sh.path" as its path file despite its own
name being "ld-musl-superh.so.1". there was some sentiment in both
directions as to how to resolve the inconsistency, but overall "sh"
was favored.
|
