eandrews added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D36712#842477, @kparzysz wrote:
> In the cases when the section is explicitly given on a definition, it was > likely imposed by something like the "section" attribute in the source. I > don't think it's unreasonable to expect that the declarations (in the > original source as well as in the generated IR) should carry that information > as well. However, since clang has apparently been ignoring that attribute on > declarations, it's been generating IR where declarations may not have > sections, but the corresponding definitions do. Does this result in unexpected behavior though? Won't this just result in the global being defined in the specified section? I can mention this case explicitly in the documentation. However I am not sure whether it's UB or if the global will be defined in specified section. https://reviews.llvm.org/D36712 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
