ia64 vtable entries (was: C implementations of the C++ ABI)

[Jim Dehnert]

>I think it's unreasonable.  If we want this kind of relocation
>we should invent a new relocation type.  Which I don't necessarily
>think is unreasonable, but a pure pic solution without any runtime
>relocation requirement might be better.
>
>IPLT just has too many other semantics.

???  IPLT has very simple semantics:  Here's a function descriptor,
here's the function it refers to, fill in the descriptor with the
function's address and GP.  No more, no less.  All we're suggesting is
removal of the restriction that it not occur in relocatable objects.

>What exactly are you going to do when IPLT appears in a relocatable
>object, referencing a dynamic symbol, and so needs to be copied into
>the dso?  How are you going to differentiate that from an IPLT reloc
>that is associated with the .IA_64.pltoff array? 

We want the linker to transfer the relocation to the output object file
for resolution by the dynamic linker.  The dynamic linker should handle
them exactly like it does the .IA_64.pltoff relocations -- the
semantics is identical.  So they don't need to be differentiated.

Jim

-	    Jim Dehnert		dehnert at sgi.com
				(650)933-4272