This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: PATCH: Use COMDAT section group instead of gnu.linkonce


On Wed, May 05, 2004 at 11:39:25AM -0700, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> "H. J. Lu" <hjl@lucon.org> writes:
> 
> > On Tue, May 04, 2004 at 11:52:54AM -0700, Mike Stump wrote:
> >> On Monday, May 3, 2004, at 10:46 PM, H. J. Lu wrote:
> >> >Should we start moving toward COMDAT section group? It will help fix
> >> >DWARF2 problems.
> >> 
> >> We are in favor of this.  Our platform doesn't yet have group COMDAT, 
> >> but, that is the way we know we need to go.  Thanks.
> >
> > This patch enables COMDAT group. It even works with
> >
> > const int foo __attribute__((section(".gnu.linkonce.r.foo")));
> >
> > There are no regressions on ia32, ia64 and x86-64. You just need to
> > apply
> >
> > http://sources.redhat.com/ml/binutils/2004-05/msg00022.html
> >
> > on top of the current binutils in CVS.
> 
> Uh, surely there is a better way to do this than a long chain of
> strcmp() operations on the linkonce section name?
> 

I want to keep my change to minimal and support existing source code.
The majority of .gnu.linkonce.* name will match one of them. I can
change it a little bit. But I don't think I can totally avoid it. Any
suggestions?


H.J.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]