This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH 06/10] Heart of the JIT implementation (was: Re: [PATCH 0/5] Merger of jit branch (v2))
- From: "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- To: David Malcolm <dmalcolm at redhat dot com>
- Cc: <jit at gcc dot gnu dot org>, "gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2014 00:50:55 +0000
- Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/10] Heart of the JIT implementation (was: Re: [PATCH 0/5] Merger of jit branch (v2))
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <1413222308-25753-1-git-send-email-dmalcolm at redhat dot com> <1413299342 dot 9513 dot 50 dot camel at surprise> <1413299604 dot 9513 dot 53 dot camel at surprise> <Pine dot LNX dot 4 dot 64 dot 1410172126240 dot 14369 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk> <1414695171 dot 29411 dot 16 dot camel at surprise>
On Thu, 30 Oct 2014, David Malcolm wrote:
> Looking at the build logs, I see:
> -fPIC
> within the xgcc args in the libgcc build logs, and
That seems to depend on t-libgcc-pic, but that appears to cover most
likely hosts (including any where I can be confident PIC is actually
needed for shared libraries).
> > It's certainly not clear that the
> > -static-libstdc++ -static-libgcc default for building the compiler
> > executables is the right one for building libgccjit.so.
>
> Agreed, but it's unclear to me what the default should be, and how to go
> about fixing it.
>
> That said, it appears that people who want the libgccjit.so to
> dynamically-link against libgcc and libstdc++ can already do so, by
Can do so for libgccjit.so but not the compiler executables?
(There are no doubt cases where it makes sense for the compiler
executables to be dynamically linked with the shared libraries, but also I
think cases for linking only libgccjit.so with the shared libraries.)
> Do you have thoughts on how I should address this? Also, given that the
No.
> code works as-is, is resolving this a blocker for merging the jit
> branch? (I've been rebasing, and plan to repost the fixed-up patches
> for review shortly)
I don't see it as a blocker, but I would not be surprised if having the
libraries statically linked into libgccjit.so causes problems (is it safe
to have two completely separate copies of libstdc++ in the same process?
I don't know.).
--
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com