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: [trans-mem] PR 47952 Re: weak aliases, .tm_clone_table, and binutils confusion

From: Patrick Marlier <patrick dot marlier at unine dot ch>
To: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>
Cc: Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at redhat dot com>, GCC Patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2011 17:39:30 +0200
Subject: Re: [trans-mem] PR 47952 Re: weak aliases, .tm_clone_table, and binutils confusion
References: <4D712A21.3080400@redhat.com> <alpine.DEB.2.00.1103042006290.9242@localhost6.localdomain6> <4D714379.9040708@redhat.com> <alpine.DEB.2.00.1103061243310.28704@localhost6.localdomain6> <4D757D5F.8040800@redhat.com> <4D7603D8.5070005@unine.ch>

About this line of my patch for aliases:
DECL_WEAK (tm_alias) = DECL_WEAK (alias->decl);
You can reproduce it with the same testcase, looking at these symbols:
.weak _ZNSt14_List_iteratorIN4Game12BuildProjectEEC1EPSt15_List_node_base
.globl
_ZGTtNSt14_List_iteratorIN4Game12BuildProjectEEC1EPSt15_List_node_base
The clone version should be also weak.

Ping to this? I know that is not causing a big problem but I think the clone should be coherent with the original.

Should I fill another PR just for this? (even if obvious).

Patrick Marlier.

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