probinson added a comment. In D97446#2587996 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D97446#2587996>, @MaskRay wrote:
> In D97446#2587806 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D97446#2587806>, @probinson wrote: > >>> GNU ld has a rule "start_/stop_ references from a live input section retain >>> the associated C identifier name sections", which LLD may change in the >>> future (D96914 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D96914>). >> >> The phrasing "may change" implies LLD could eliminate the rule; in fact >> D96914 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D96914> will only add a way to opt-out of >> the rule. You can't eliminate the rule entirely without breaking a lot of >> useful cases. > > Reworded this sentence. D96914 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D96914> does add a > way to opt-out of the rule. In the future (when toolchains are more mature) > we may try. My internal tests and Linux kernel tests are try to state that we > may not have many dependent cases. My guess is that many use-cases for `__start_/__stop_` and `used` sections are in test and debugging code; it might not be obvious where a dependency is, and it might well be the case that GC-ing these sections will make something useless without actively breaking it. The behavior of `__start_/__stop_` has been in place for a very long time, IIUC, and it would be very hard to prove that nothing bad will happen if you eliminate that behavior. I don't think "Linux will still boot" is a particularly exhaustive test case. Rather than just make vague worried noises, I will work on putting up a patch with my particular use-case, and we can see whether I am worried over nothing. If we're lucky I can do that tomorrow, or it might take another week. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D97446/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D97446 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
