https://github.com/MaskRay updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/149465
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/MaskRay updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/149465
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
MaskRay wrote:
Can use some description what is the correct behavior.
Perhaps
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Optimize-Options.html#index-falign-functions
> If n is not specified or is zero, use a machine-dependent default.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/149445
_
https://github.com/MaskRay updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/149465
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/MaskRay updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/149465
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/MaskRay updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/149465
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/MaskRay updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/149465
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
@@ -230,22 +230,24 @@ uint64_t MCAssembler::computeFragmentSize(const
MCFragment &F) const {
case MCFragment::FT_Align: {
unsigned Offset = F.Offset + F.getFixedSize();
unsigned Size = offsetToAlignment(Offset, F.getAlignment());
-
-// Insert extra Nops for code
@@ -433,42 +434,44 @@ static void writeFragment(raw_ostream &OS, const
MCAssembler &Asm,
const auto &EF = cast(F);
OS << StringRef(EF.getContents().data(), EF.getContents().size());
OS << StringRef(EF.getVarContents().data(), EF.getVarContents().size());
-if (F
https://github.com/MaskRay updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/149465
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
@@ -992,7 +965,30 @@ void MCAssembler::layoutSection(MCSection &Sec) {
uint64_t Offset = 0;
for (MCFragment &F : Sec) {
F.Offset = Offset;
-Offset += computeFragmentSize(F);
+if (F.getKind() == MCFragment::FT_Align) {
+ Offset += F.getFixedSize();
+ un
MaskRay wrote:
Next steps:
* Allocate the fixed content as trailing data of the MCFragment by utilizing a
special bump allocator (gnulib obstack)
* Delete MCFixup member variables from MCFragment. Instead, add a MCFragment
pointer to MCFixup.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/149465
_
https://github.com/MaskRay edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/149465
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/MaskRay updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/149465
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/MaskRay approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/149578
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
Author: Fangrui Song
Date: 2025-07-04T00:58:07-07:00
New Revision: 7e3e2e1b8c6ff21e68782a56164139cca334fcf3
URL:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/7e3e2e1b8c6ff21e68782a56164139cca334fcf3
DIFF:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/7e3e2e1b8c6ff21e68782a56164139cca334fcf3.diff
https://github.com/MaskRay approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/147227
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/MaskRay approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/147916
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/MaskRay approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/147917
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/MaskRay approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/147915
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/MaskRay created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/149465
Previously, two MCAsmBackend hooks were used, with
shouldInsertFixupForCodeAlign calling getWriter().recordRelocation
directly, bypassing generic code.
This patch:
* Introduces MCAsmBackend::relaxAlign to repla
MaskRay wrote:
I haven't had the chance to review this patch in detail, but I’m concerned
about the number of linker options required for the CFI feature. While I
recognize its benefits, the complexity seems excessive.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/149448
__
@@ -230,22 +230,24 @@ uint64_t MCAssembler::computeFragmentSize(const
MCFragment &F) const {
case MCFragment::FT_Align: {
unsigned Offset = F.Offset + F.getFixedSize();
unsigned Size = offsetToAlignment(Offset, F.getAlignment());
-
-// Insert extra Nops for code
https://github.com/MaskRay edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/149465
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
@@ -53,3 +53,4 @@ LLVM_FIXED_MD_KIND(MD_DIAssignID, "DIAssignID", 38)
LLVM_FIXED_MD_KIND(MD_coro_outside_frame, "coro.outside.frame", 39)
LLVM_FIXED_MD_KIND(MD_mmra, "mmra", 40)
LLVM_FIXED_MD_KIND(MD_noalias_addrspace, "noalias.addrspace", 41)
+LLVM_FIXED_MD_KIND(MD_elf_section
https://github.com/MaskRay approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/149756
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/MaskRay approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/142311
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/MaskRay created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/144633
Rename these relocation specifier constants, aligning with the naming
convention used by other targets (`S_` instead of `VK_`).
* ELF/COFF: AArch64MCExpr::VK_ => AArch64::S_ (VK_ABS/VK_PAGE_ABS are
also used b
@@ -41,6 +44,61 @@ void MCGOFFStreamer::changeSection(MCSection *Section,
uint32_t Subsection) {
MCObjectStreamer::changeSection(Section, Subsection);
}
+void MCGOFFStreamer::emitLabel(MCSymbol *Symbol, SMLoc Loc) {
+ MCObjectStreamer::emitLabel(Symbol, Loc);
+ cast(Symbo
https://github.com/MaskRay edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/144437
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/MaskRay commented:
LGTM! But I will delegated to a GOFF expert for approval...
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/144437
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/ma
https://github.com/MaskRay updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/144633
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/MaskRay updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/144633
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
@@ -0,0 +1,67 @@
+# RUN: yaml2obj %s -o %t
+# RUN: llvm-objdump %t -d --symbolize-operands --no-show-raw-insn
--no-leading-addr | \
+# RUN: FileCheck %s --match-full-lines -DABS_ADRP_VAL=0x6000
+# RUN: llvm-objdump %t -d --symbolize-operands --no-show-raw-insn
--no-leading-add
https://github.com/MaskRay approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/145009
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/MaskRay commented:
Looks good, but I'd check whether @jh7370 has opinions on the test.
(We need an executable for testing. llvm/test cannot use lld, so we have to
resort to hexadecimal bytes...)
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/145009
@@ -0,0 +1,94 @@
+//===- TargetImpl.h -*- C++
-*-===//
+//
+// Part of the LLVM Project, under the Apache License v2.0 with LLVM
Exceptions.
+// See https://llvm.org/LICENSE.txt for license information.
+// SPDX-License-Identifier: Apa
@@ -0,0 +1,98 @@
+# REQUIRES: x86
+
+## Test that the branch-to-branch optimization follows the links
+## from f1 -> f2 -> f3 and updates all references to point to f3.
+
+# RUN: llvm-mc -filetype=obj -triple=x86_64-pc-linux %s -o %t.o
+# RUN: ld.lld %t.o -o %t --branch-to-branch
@@ -0,0 +1,92 @@
+//===- TargetImpl.h -*- C++
-*-===//
+//
+// Part of the LLVM Project, under the Apache License v2.0 with LLVM
Exceptions.
+// See https://llvm.org/LICENSE.txt for license information.
+// SPDX-License-Identifier: Apa
@@ -0,0 +1,94 @@
+//===- TargetImpl.h -*- C++
-*-===//
MaskRay wrote:
`//===--===//`
for new file per https://llvm.org/docs/CodingStandards.html#file
MaskRay wrote:
> [pcc](https://github.com/pcc) wants to merge 1 commit into
> [users/pcc/spr/main.elf-add-branch-to-branch-optimization](https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/tree/users/pcc/spr/main.elf-add-branch-to-branch-optimization)
> from
> [users/pcc/spr/elf-add-branch-to-branch-optimiza
@@ -975,6 +977,62 @@ void AArch64::relocateAlloc(InputSectionBase &sec, uint8_t
*buf) const {
}
}
+static std::optional getControlTransferAddend(InputSection &is,
+Relocation &r) {
+ // Identify a control transfer rel
MaskRay wrote:
Perhaps you'll need to change the base branch to `main` and force push to
users/pcc/spr/elf-add-branch-to-branch-optimization?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/138366
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lis
@@ -0,0 +1,94 @@
+//===- TargetImpl.h -*- C++
-*-===//
+//
+// Part of the LLVM Project, under the Apache License v2.0 with LLVM
Exceptions.
+// See https://llvm.org/LICENSE.txt for license information.
+// SPDX-License-Identifier: Apa
@@ -26,19 +26,15 @@ GOFFObjectWriter &MCGOFFStreamer::getWriter() {
return static_cast(getAssembler().getWriter());
}
-// Make sure that all section are registered in the correct order.
-static void registerSectionHierarchy(MCAssembler &Asm, MCSectionGOFF *Section)
{
- if
https://github.com/MaskRay approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/149723
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/MaskRay approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/149733
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/MaskRay updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/150183
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/MaskRay updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/150183
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/MaskRay updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/150183
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/MaskRay updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/150183
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/MaskRay approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/150172
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/MaskRay approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/150811
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/MaskRay approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/150810
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
@@ -470,7 +461,6 @@ class DynamicReloc {
void computeRaw(Ctx &, SymbolTableBaseSection *symt);
Symbol *sym;
- const OutputSection *outputSec = nullptr;
MaskRay wrote:
Thanks for removing `outputSec`!
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/150810
MaskRay wrote:
Is this the last change in the patch series? The use of booleans is a good move
to prevent the complexity of MIPS-style dynamic relocations (which I haven’t
fully analyzed). Thanks for tidying this up!
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/150813
https://github.com/MaskRay approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/150813
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
MaskRay wrote:
There are some discussions on a codegen patch #149444 that I did not follow.
Could you summarize the motivation in this patch's description?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/150151
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-bran
https://github.com/MaskRay approved this pull request.
When DynamicReloc::Kind was introduced, I was concerned of the many Kinds, but
that was still better than the previous state. Thanks for the simplification.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/150798
__
MaskRay wrote:
> The current code is quite crusty and divergent from non-MIPS in API use, but
> fixing it up like this is quite high-risk, especially given how weird the
> MIPS GOT is when it comes to the required initial memory state. Is anyone
> using LLD for MIPS these days who can test thi
https://github.com/MaskRay approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/150730
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/MaskRay approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/150799
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/MaskRay approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/151674
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
MaskRay wrote:
> > @androm3da The hexagon-thunks-packets.s test added by this change is
> > failing on our s390x builds.
> > See
> > [download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-llvm-team/llvm21/fedora-rawhide-s390x/09365945-llvm/builder-live.log.gz](https://download.copr.fedorainfraclou
https://github.com/MaskRay approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/151886
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/MaskRay created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/150183
registerSection should only be called by
MCObjectStreamer::changeSection. This will be utilized by a pending
change to move initial fragment allocation from MCContext::createSection
to MCStreamer::changeSection,
https://github.com/MaskRay approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/150797
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/MaskRay approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/150812
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
@@ -50,26 +53,26 @@ class MCSectionGOFF final : public MCSection {
friend class MCContext;
friend class MCSymbolGOFF;
- MCSectionGOFF(StringRef Name, SectionKind K, GOFF::SDAttr SDAttributes,
-MCSectionGOFF *Parent)
- : MCSection(SV_GOFF, Name, K.isTe
MaskRay wrote:
The goal is to differentiate two scenarios when a symbol is referenced by a
potential R_X86_64_PLT32 relocation:
* `.4byte foo@plt - .` (LLVM assembly extension, not supported in GNU
assembler): No redirection to a thunk. References foo or its PLT entry.
* `jmp foo; .section .te
MaskRay wrote:
> @MaskRay Sorry, your comment is basically empty. I guess a GitHub problem?
Sorry... Could be my accidentally pushing a comment to a wrong PR..
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/133799
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm
MaskRay wrote:
I've read
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/138366#issuecomment-2855889424 but I
am still not following.
What is invalid?
Note that range extension thunks track both the symbol and the addend (e.g.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D70637 (AArch64)).
So we could add a thunk for
@@ -0,0 +1,39 @@
+
MaskRay wrote:
Use `clang/test/CodeGen/debug-info-*.c`? We use `%clang_cc1` in almost all
non-driver tests
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/134635
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-
https://github.com/MaskRay requested changes to this pull request.
While at Google, I encountered this issue co-authored the glibc commit
b5c45e83753b27dc538dff2d55d4410c385cf3a4.
I don’t believe this is relevant for upstream LLD, so I haven’t pursued
submitting a linker patch.
The piece of LLD
@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+// RUN: llvm-mc -triple aarch64-elf -filetype=obj %s -o - | llvm-objdump -r -
| FileCheck %s
+
+// Test that PATCHINST appears after JUMP26.
+// CHECK: R_AARCH64_JUMP26
+// CHECK-NEXT: R_AARCH64_PATCHINST
+.reloc ., R_AARCH64_PATCHINST, ds
+b f1
@@ -0,0 +1,87 @@
+# RUN: rm -rf %t && split-file %s %t
MaskRay wrote:
consider adding `&& cd %t` so that we can remove `%t/` below, which clutter up
the commands...
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/133534
___
https://github.com/MaskRay edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/133534
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/MaskRay approved this pull request.
The assembler part (BinaryFormat / Target/AArch64 changes) look good. The
linker change should be made separate. But thank for combining this in a single
PR, making the full picture clear:)
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/133534
@@ -61,6 +61,7 @@ ELF_RELOC(R_AARCH64_LD64_GOT_LO12_NC,0x138)
ELF_RELOC(R_AARCH64_LD64_GOTPAGE_LO15, 0x139)
ELF_RELOC(R_AARCH64_PLT32, 0x13a)
ELF_RELOC(R_AARCH64_GOTPCREL32, 0x13b)
+ELF_RELOC(R_AARCH64
MaskRay wrote:
> The R_AARCH64_PATCHINST relocation type is to support deactivation symbols.
> For more information, see the RFC:
> [discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-deactivation-symbols/85556](https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-deactivation-symbols/85556)
>
> An AArch64 psABI extension proposal has bee
MaskRay wrote:
Need an aarch64 maintainer's signoff on the llvm part.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/133534
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch
https://github.com/MaskRay approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/153670
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
@@ -361,6 +361,10 @@ static void attemptToFoldSymbolOffsetDifference(const
MCAssembler *Asm,
if (BBeforeRelax && AAfterRelax)
return;
}
+ const auto *RF = dyn_cast(F);
+ if (RF && RF->isLinkerRelaxable()) {
+return;
Ma
https://github.com/MaskRay approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/153670
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/MaskRay approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/157236
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/MaskRay approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/156538
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
MaskRay wrote:
The previous, uglified lld tests, and this, make me believe that we should
revisit the lit feature. I am not sure I agree with this test rewriting.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/157232
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
ll
https://github.com/MaskRay approved this pull request.
LGTM.
It's good to get rid of `$(($(cat %t.size.txt) + 5))`
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/156537
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.l
@@ -330,6 +325,18 @@ bool MachineFunction::shouldSplitStack() const {
return getFunction().hasFnAttribute("split-stack");
}
+Align MachineFunction::getPreferredAlignment() const {
+ Align PrefAlignment = Align(1);
MaskRay wrote:
Instead of reassigning to t
MaskRay wrote:
This looks good regardless of the CFI jump table usage.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/155540
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch
MaskRay wrote:
The property, if we decide to introduce, does not need to be too extensible.
That is because within the section header type `Elf64_Shdr`, `sh_name,
sh_offset, sh_size, sh_link, sh_info` can already be controlled. This patch
makes sh_type/sh_entsize customiable. I wonder whether
https://github.com/MaskRay edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/133531
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/MaskRay commented:
The lld part should be extracted to a separate patch. The patch has a base
branch. Is it still used?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/133531
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.
@@ -0,0 +1,18 @@
+# REQUIRES: aarch64
+
+# RUN: llvm-mc -filetype=obj -triple=aarch64 %s -o %t.o
+# RUN: not ld.lld %t.o -o %t 2>&1 | FileCheck --check-prefix=ERR %s
+
+.rodata
+# ERR: relocation R_AARCH64_FUNCINIT64 cannot be used against local symbol
MaskRay wro
@@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
+# REQUIRES: aarch64
+
+# RUN: llvm-mc -filetype=obj -triple=aarch64 %s -o %t.o
+# RUN: ld.lld %t.o -o %t
+# RUN: llvm-readelf -s -r %t | FileCheck %s
+# RUN: ld.lld %t.o -o %t -pie
+# RUN: llvm-readelf -s -r %t | FileCheck %s
+# RUN: not ld.lld %t.o -o %t -shared
https://github.com/MaskRay approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/159420
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/MaskRay approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/159948
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
701 - 797 of 797 matches
Mail list logo