[Bug gold/19842] LTO build fails to write call address for weak symbol reference

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19842 --- Comment #26 from Alan Modra --- > What's your reasoning? If the prevailing definition is in the IR, the > compiler will (theoretically) supply a more-optimized version of that > function than the one in the non-LTO object. Why

[Bug gold/19842] LTO build fails to write call address for weak symbol reference

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19842 --- Comment #25 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org --- The master branch has been updated by Cary Coutant : https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=648c5cbbf34dcbf96bde7e07b14868777fd5d635 commit

[Bug gold/19842] LTO build fails to write call address for weak symbol reference

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19842 --- Comment #24 from Cary Coutant --- > If _bfd_elf_merge_symbol sets *skip, then the new symbol will be ignored. We > don't want to do that with a new real weak symbol if we currently have an > IR-only definition (either strong or weak).

[Bug ld/19851] Binutils fails to build with -O0

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19851 Alan Modra changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug ld/19851] Binutils fails to build with -O0

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19851 --- Comment #1 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org --- The master branch has been updated by Alan Modra : https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=6f4c0a426c653867c40936a9b8f503628adbd64b commit

[Bug gold/19842] LTO build fails to write call address for weak symbol reference

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19842 --- Comment #23 from Alan Modra --- If _bfd_elf_merge_symbol sets *skip, then the new symbol will be ignored. We don't want to do that with a new real weak symbol if we currently have an IR-only definition (either strong or weak). -- You

[Bug gold/19842] LTO build fails to write call address for weak symbol reference

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19842 --- Comment #22 from Cary Coutant --- > Hmmm. Unless this was part of an attempt to preserve existing behavior while > moving from a separate hash table to using the new flags, it looks like an > unrelated change that was slipped into this

[Bug gold/19842] LTO build fails to write call address for weak symbol reference

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19842 --- Comment #21 from Cary Coutant --- >/* Skip weak definitions of symbols that are already defined. */ >if (newdef && olddef && newweak) > { > - *skip = TRUE; > + /* Don't skip new non-IR weak syms. */ > + if

[Bug gold/19842] LTO build fails to write call address for weak symbol reference

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19842 --- Comment #20 from H.J. Lu --- (In reply to Cary Coutant from comment #19) > > commit 3a5dbfb2502e7a49422f13c9cec2becfd46f44f1 > > Author: Alan Modra > > Date: Tue Jun 21 14:55:26 2011 + > > > > * elflink.c

[Bug gold/19842] LTO build fails to write call address for weak symbol reference

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19842 --- Comment #19 from Cary Coutant --- > commit 3a5dbfb2502e7a49422f13c9cec2becfd46f44f1 > Author: Alan Modra > Date: Tue Jun 21 14:55:26 2011 + > > * elflink.c (_bfd_elf_merge_symbol): Allow type changes for >

[Bug gold/19842] LTO build fails to write call address for weak symbol reference

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19842 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added CC||amodra at gmail dot com --- Comment #18

[Bug gold/19842] LTO build fails to write call address for weak symbol reference

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19842 --- Comment #17 from Cary Coutant --- > For ld, non-LTO definition takes precedence over LTO one. What symbol resolution does ld tell the compiler for the LTO definition? The LTO design was intended to preserve the same binding order that

[Bug gold/19842] LTO build fails to write call address for weak symbol reference

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19842 --- Comment #16 from H.J. Lu --- For ld, non-LTO definition takes precedence over LTO one. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list

[Bug gold/19842] LTO build fails to write call address for weak symbol reference

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19842 --- Comment #15 from H.J. Lu --- Here is the difference between gold and ld: [hjl@gnu-6 test]$ cat foo.c #include void foo () __attribute__ ((weak)); void foo () { printf ("Non-LTO\n"); } void bar () { } [hjl@gnu-6 test]$ cat foo1.c

[Bug gold/19002] .eh_frame error: "no .eh_frame_hdr table will be created" with gold

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19002 --- Comment #6 from Evgeniy Stepanov --- The bfd linker warning about not being able to build .eh_frame_hdr was very useful for me. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

[Bug gold/19019] [SPARC64] Only registers %g[2367] can be declared using STT_REGISTER when linking against libsystemd

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19019 Cary Coutant changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug gold/19002] .eh_frame error: "no .eh_frame_hdr table will be created" with gold

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19002 Cary Coutant changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #5 from Cary

[Bug gold/19002] .eh_frame error: "no .eh_frame_hdr table will be created" with gold

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19002 --- Comment #4 from Evgeniy Stepanov --- Thank you, Cary! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org

[Bug ld/19851] New: Binutils fails to build with -O0

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19851 Bug ID: 19851 Summary: Binutils fails to build with -O0 Product: binutils Version: 2.26 Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: ld

[Bug gold/19842] LTO build fails to write call address for weak symbol reference

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19842 --- Comment #14 from Matt Godbolt --- I've sent my full results to H.J.Lu and Cary directly. Thanks both. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___

[Bug gold/19842] LTO build fails to write call address for weak symbol reference

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19842 --- Comment #13 from Matt Godbolt --- Thanks, I will do. grepping the -v output: $ grep '_ZNSt8functionIFvvEED[12]Ev' gcc_verbose_output /tmp/gcc/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/5.2.0/../../../../x86_64-linux-gnu/bin/ld:

[Bug gold/19842] LTO build fails to write call address for weak symbol reference

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19842 --- Comment #12 from H.J. Lu --- (In reply to Matt Godbolt from comment #11) > Hi H.J. Lu, > > I've made a build of your binutils, supplied -Wl,-plugin-save-temps and kept > all the files generated. I will share the files with you over

[Bug gold/19842] LTO build fails to write call address for weak symbol reference

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19842 --- Comment #11 from Matt Godbolt --- Hi H.J. Lu, I've made a build of your binutils, supplied -Wl,-plugin-save-temps and kept all the files generated. I will share the files with you over email. Looking at the ltrans1.o file generated with

[Bug binutils/19850] [Fix] Wrong parsing attribute in DW_FORM_flag_present form. (Info pointer Warning) + Patch

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19850 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |WAITING CC|

[Bug gold/19842] LTO build fails to write call address for weak symbol reference

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19842 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com --- Comment #10

[Bug binutils/19850] New: [Fix] Wrong parsing attribute in DW_FORM_flag_present form. (Info pointer Warning) + Patch

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19850 Bug ID: 19850 Summary: [Fix] Wrong parsing attribute in DW_FORM_flag_present form. (Info pointer Warning) + Patch Product: binutils Version: 2.27 (HEAD) Status: NEW

[Bug gold/19842] LTO build fails to write call address for weak symbol reference

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19842 --- Comment #9 from Matt Godbolt --- Hi H.J.Hu, Cary already made a patched binutils (users/ccoutant/gold-record) which does a similar thing: that's how Cary was able to debug further. Would it be useful for me to build your branch too and

[Bug gold/19842] LTO build fails to write call address for weak symbol reference

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19842 --- Comment #8 from H.J. Lu --- users/hjl/lto-mixed/master branch implemented -plugin-save-temps linker option. It can be used together with GCC -save-temps to figure out what ld does. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the

[Bug gold/19823] gold produces copy reloc of protected symbols

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19823 --- Comment #6 from Rafael Ávila de Espíndola --- > Or, perhaps (I need to check...), gold might be incorrectly allowing > the COPY relocation to a protected symbol, failing to consider that > the bindings within the shared object will be

[Bug gold/19842] LTO build fails to write call address for weak symbol reference

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19842 Markus Trippelsdorf changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hubicka at ucw dot cz,

[Bug ld/19803] gc-sections breaks PE DLL variable export

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19803 --- Comment #14 from martin.koegler at chello dot at --- You can consider my xstrdup use as a bug [safest choice]. Binutils 2.26 + patch from Comment #13 works for a larger project for x86_64-w32-mingw. For i686-w64-mingw32, I have an issue