https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108761
Paul Robinson <paul_robinson at playstation dot sony.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |paul_robinson at playstation
dot s
| |ony.com
--- Comment #4 from Paul Robinson <paul_robinson at playstation dot sony.com>
---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> I think an option would be the wrong appoarch because many of the times, you
> are marking a variable inside a section exactly because you want it to be
> part of an "array".
I think distinct options for -ffunction-sections and -fdata-sections
would be the answer to that. I mean, we _already_ have separation
options, so handling code and data independently makes sense.
> I think rather section should have a secondary argument which mark as
> needing to append the function name on it ...
I believe the linker will not take an input with sections "foo.f" and
"foo.g" and concatenate them into a single "foo" section in the linked object.
That special behavior works only for standard sections like .text AFAIK.
The Clang change proposes using section groups instead, so the final
section has the name the user specified.
I don't know whether this would work for non-ELF object formats.
I suspect COFF would be okay, as it has no-deduplicate COMDAT.
