Bug in module loading system on x86-64?

Adam Jackson ajax at nwnk.net
Fri Oct 1 15:00:58 PDT 2004

On Friday 01 October 2004 15:37, Kendall Bennett wrote:
> Stuart Anderson <anderson at netsweng.com> wrote:
> > Once memory starts getting allocated from beyond 4G, 32 bit
> > relocation just aren't big enough. I saw something like this a
> > long time ago on a PPC, which has a 24 bit offset jump instruction,
> > but the modules were being loaded more than 24 bits apart. This was
> > fixed by creating a small code stub to jump into, which then did a
> > full 32 bit jump to the destination. I bet something similar could
> > be done here if in fact this turns out to be the problem.
> Right, that could be part of the problem. Although it looked like the
> symbol itself was not resolved properly (but I am not familiar with how
> symbols are resolved with the X loaders).

I would not be surprised at all if the elfloader code was not 64-bit clean.  
To me that sounds like a strong motivation to just use dlloader instead.

Not that anyone should be surprised to hear me say that.

If anyone does try to reproduce this, I would be very interested to know if it 
fails for one loader but not the other.

- ajax
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg/attachments/20041001/3054dbe1/attachment.pgp>

More information about the xorg mailing list