jakehehrlich added a comment.

In D60974#1477690 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D60974#1477690>, @compnerd wrote:

> @jakehehrlich - when do you expect to have your idea put up?  I don't think 
> that it is fair to have this wait until you have time to put something up 
> that can be discussed.  I think that getting this working and then iterating 
> on it and migrating it over to some shared representation is something which 
> we could do - that tends to be a common thing that I have seen happen 
> multiple times with the necessary work never materialising.  Re-use of the 
> YAML structure means that we can iterate and identify the pieces that are 
> necessary, though, I expect that largely, what will be needed is the name, 
> the binding, the visibility, possibly the size (for TBEs), the section, and 
> the type, at least for anything which adheres to the GABI.  If you have 
> extensions outside of GABI, this will need to be adjusted.


I don't know when but in the next 2 days likely. Regardless of my timeline I 
don't think I'm blocking anyone. I'm just saying that I will put up a proposal. 
You should also put up a proposal as well. The yaml2obj format is just not well 
designed for any purpose but is far from designed for this purpose. yaml2obj 
works ok-ish for testing. I'd rather start with a minimal format and then add 
things to it rather than starting with a bloated and ill designed format and 
then create a new format from that experience. Creating a minimal format 
shouldn't be hard and I suspect our proposal will look extremely similar; I'd 
wager if you put up a proposal I'd probably just review your proposal rather 
than bother writing out my own.

As for what I think it would entail. I think name, weather or not the symbol is 
defined or undefined, visibility, size, alignment (this is a feature of the 
section and the symbol offset) and type will all mater but not all combinations 
make sense. Sections don't matter as it turns out but alignment does for copy 
relocations. When we started llvm-elfabi I thought at least the section 
permissions mattered but they don't really. While .tbe has things like soname 
and dt_needed that isn't needed here.  The top of the file should probably 
contain the architecture. Other details in the ELF header shouldn't be needed.


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D60974/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D60974



_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to