https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26404
ceri dwen changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dwenceri484 at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26404
--- Comment #11 from Fangrui Song ---
My latest revision of https://reviews.llvm.org/D103303 switched to a new
keyword "OVERWRITE_SECTIONS". I dropped the command line option.One can place
more than descriptions, though there is no ordering re
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26404
Roland McGrath changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||roland at gnu dot org
--- Comment #1
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26404
--- Comment #9 from Fangrui Song ---
I created a ld.lld patch for the --overwrite-script idea
https://reviews.llvm.org/D103303
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26404
--- Comment #8 from Fangrui Song ---
(In reply to Nick Clifton from comment #7)
> (In reply to Fangrui Song from comment #6)
>
> > scriptfile defines multiple SECTIONS commands. Each SECTIONS defines exactly
> > one output section (for the fi
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26404
--- Comment #7 from Nick Clifton ---
(In reply to Fangrui Song from comment #6)
> scriptfile defines multiple SECTIONS commands. Each SECTIONS defines exactly
> one output section (for the first implementation we make the scope as narrow
> as
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26404
--- Comment #6 from Fangrui Song ---
I try to incorporate the previous ideas. A concrete proposal:
Add --overwrite-script=
scriptfile defines multiple SECTIONS commands. Each SECTIONS defines exactly an
output section (for the first impleme
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26404
--- Comment #5 from Fangrui Song ---
Nick and Peter, thanks for looking into the feature request :)
(In reply to Nick Clifton from comment #4)
> (In reply to Peter Smith from comment #3)
> > As I understand it [*] just adding the script on th
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26404
--- Comment #4 from Nick Clifton ---
(In reply to Peter Smith from comment #3)
> As I understand it [*] just adding the script on the command line but
> without the -T or --script will cause the linker to merge without the need
> for INSERT et
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26404
--- Comment #3 from Peter Smith ---
As I understand it [*] just adding the script on the command line but without
the -T or --script will cause the linker to merge without the need for INSERT
etc.
I agree that this is not intuitive outside th
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26404
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
--- Comment #2
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26404
--- Comment #1 from Fangrui Song ---
Another use case.
GCC ipa-preorder (call graph profiling)
https://gcc.gnu.org/legacy-ml/gcc-patches/2019-09/msg01142.html
If such an extension exists, users don't have to upgrade binutils to have
*(SORT(.
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26404
Fangrui Song changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||peter.smith at arm dot com
--
You are
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26404
Fangrui Song changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amodra at gmail dot com
--
You are re
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26404
Fangrui Song changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||phosek at google dot com
--
You are r
15 matches
Mail list logo
