It is being discussed on llvm-dev
(https://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2020-May/141885.html
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/llvm-dev/i0DFx6YSqDA)
what linkers should do regarding relocations referencing dropped functions (due
to section group rules, --gc-sections, /DISCARD/, etc) in
On 2020-05-31, Fangrui Song wrote:
It is being discussed on llvm-dev
(https://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2020-May/141885.html
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/llvm-dev/i0DFx6YSqDA)
what linkers should do regarding relocations referencing dropped functions (due
to section group rule
On 2020-05-31, Mark Wielaard wrote:
Hi,
On Sun, May 31, 2020 at 11:55:06AM -0700, Fangrui Song via Elfutils-devel wrote:
what linkers should do regarding relocations referencing dropped
functions (due to section group rules, --gc-sections, /DISCARD/,
etc) in .debug_*
As an example
On 2020-06-03, Alan Modra wrote:
On Tue, Jun 02, 2020 at 11:06:10AM -0700, David Blaikie via Binutils wrote:
On Tue, Jun 2, 2020 at 9:50 AM Mark Wielaard wrote:
> where I
> would argue the compiler simply needs to make sure that if it generates
> code in separate sections it also should create
I want to revive the thread, but focus on whether a tombstone value
(-1/-2) in .debug_* can cause trouble to various DWARF consumers (gdb,
debug related tools in elfutils and other utilities I don't know about).
Paul Robinson has proposed that DWARF v6 should reserve a tombstone
value (the value
