On 11/01/17 16:14, Christophe Lyon wrote:
> On 11 January 2017 at 17:13, Christophe Lyon
> wrote:
>> On 11 January 2017 at 16:48, Richard Earnshaw (lists)
>> wrote:
>>> On 01/12/16 14:27, Christophe Lyon wrote:
Hi,
On 10 November 2016 at 15:10, Christophe Lyon
wrote:
>>
On 11 January 2017 at 16:48, Richard Earnshaw (lists)
wrote:
> On 01/12/16 14:27, Christophe Lyon wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>>
>> On 10 November 2016 at 15:10, Christophe Lyon
>> wrote:
>>> On 10 November 2016 at 11:05, Richard Earnshaw
>>> wrote:
On 09/11/16 21:29, Christophe Lyon wrote:
> Hi,
On 11 January 2017 at 17:13, Christophe Lyon wrote:
> On 11 January 2017 at 16:48, Richard Earnshaw (lists)
> wrote:
>> On 01/12/16 14:27, Christophe Lyon wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>>
>>> On 10 November 2016 at 15:10, Christophe Lyon
>>> wrote:
On 10 November 2016 at 11:05, Richard Earnshaw
On 01/12/16 14:27, Christophe Lyon wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> On 10 November 2016 at 15:10, Christophe Lyon
> wrote:
>> On 10 November 2016 at 11:05, Richard Earnshaw
>> wrote:
>>> On 09/11/16 21:29, Christophe Lyon wrote:
Hi,
PR 78253 shows that the handling of weak references has chang
Ping?
On 3 January 2017 at 16:45, Christophe Lyon wrote:
> Ping?
>
> The patch is at https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-12/msg00078.html
>
>
> On 14 December 2016 at 16:29, Christophe Lyon
> wrote:
>> Ping^2 ?
>>
>> As a reminder, this patch mimics what aarch64 does wrt to references to wea
Ping?
The patch is at https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-12/msg00078.html
On 14 December 2016 at 16:29, Christophe Lyon
wrote:
> Ping^2 ?
>
> As a reminder, this patch mimics what aarch64 does wrt to references to weak
> symbols such that they are not resolved by the assembler, in case a s
Ping^2 ?
As a reminder, this patch mimics what aarch64 does wrt to references to weak
symbols such that they are not resolved by the assembler, in case a strong
definition overrides the local one at link time.
Christophe
On 8 December 2016 at 09:17, Christophe Lyon wrote:
> Ping?
>
> On 1 Dece
Ping?
On 1 December 2016 at 15:27, Christophe Lyon wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> On 10 November 2016 at 15:10, Christophe Lyon
> wrote:
>> On 10 November 2016 at 11:05, Richard Earnshaw
>> wrote:
>>> On 09/11/16 21:29, Christophe Lyon wrote:
Hi,
PR 78253 shows that the handling of weak refe
Hi,
On 10 November 2016 at 15:10, Christophe Lyon
wrote:
> On 10 November 2016 at 11:05, Richard Earnshaw
> wrote:
>> On 09/11/16 21:29, Christophe Lyon wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> PR 78253 shows that the handling of weak references has changed for
>>> ARM with gcc-5.
>>>
>>> When r220674 was commit
On 10 November 2016 at 11:05, Richard Earnshaw
wrote:
> On 09/11/16 21:29, Christophe Lyon wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> PR 78253 shows that the handling of weak references has changed for
>> ARM with gcc-5.
>>
>> When r220674 was committed, default_binds_local_p_2 gained a new
>> parameter (weak_dominate),
On 09/11/16 21:29, Christophe Lyon wrote:
> Hi,
>
> PR 78253 shows that the handling of weak references has changed for
> ARM with gcc-5.
>
> When r220674 was committed, default_binds_local_p_2 gained a new
> parameter (weak_dominate), which, when true, implies that a reference
> to a weak symbol
Hi,
PR 78253 shows that the handling of weak references has changed for
ARM with gcc-5.
When r220674 was committed, default_binds_local_p_2 gained a new
parameter (weak_dominate), which, when true, implies that a reference
to a weak symbol defined locally will be resolved locally, even though
it
12 matches
Mail list logo
