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]

Re: [Proposed binutils PATCH] Re: Diagnosing an intricate C++ problem


On Sun, Sep 03, 2000 at 12:54:55AM +0200, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> On Sat, 2 Sep 2000, H . J . Lu wrote:
> >>> 2000-07-25  Loren J. Rittle  <ljrittle@acm.org>
> >>> 
> >>> 	* ldlang.c (section_already_linked): Implement check for
> >>> 	the SEC_LINK_DUPLICATES_SAME_CONTENTS case.
> >>> 
> >>> 2000-07-25  Loren J. Rittle  <ljrittle@acm.org>
> >>> 
> >>> 	* elf.c (_bfd_elf_make_section_from_shdr): Enable the checking
> >>> 	of the section contents.
> >> I built binutils 2.10 with these two patches and, on top of that,
> >> GCC mainline on FreeBSD 4.1.
> > I cannot duplicated it under Linux with the Linux binutils 2.10.0.24.
> 
> Did you apply those two patches?
> 
> Loren enhanced binutils to detect redundant/identical sections which
> actually differ.  This is incredibly helpful to detect bugs in C++
> programs, but unfortunatly the current patches cause "false" positives
> (which are not really false, just undesirable).
> 
> ld *should* warn for the example I have posted at
> <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2000-07/msg00769.html> (Also see
> <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2000-07/msg01019.html>.)

I guess I misunderstood. I don't like this patch. It creates way too
many false positives. And I don't see how linker can tell them apart.


H.J.

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