On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 4:24 PM, H. Peter Anvin <h...@zytor.com> wrote: > On 12/07/2010 04:20 PM, Andi Kleen wrote: >> >> The only problem left is mixing of lto and non lto objects. this right >> now is not handled. IMHO still the best way to handle it is to use >> slim lto and then simply separate link the "left overs" after deleting >> the LTO objects. This can be actually done with objcopy (with some >> limitations), doesn't even need linker support. >> > > Quite possibly a better way to deal with that is to provide a mechanism > for encapsulating arbitrary binary code objects inside the LTO IR. >
If IR supports it, we can use it instead of magic section name. -- H.J.
