Hello,
I have almost completed the output of relocation entries. The only thing
that remains is to output the corresponding symbols in .symtab. In my
current design, I store the info about relocation entry and the symbol
name. However, the problem I am facing with this approach is that many
Hello,
I am working on a project to produce the LTO object file from the compiler
directly. So far, we have
correctly outputted .symtab along with various .debug sections. The only
thing remaining is to
correctly output attribute values and their corresponding values in the
.debug_info section.
Hi,
As mentioned earlier in previous thread, I am working on a project to
bypass the assembler. I have already finished addition of .symtab section.
While I am currently working to emit the debugging symbols directly from
compiler, one thing which I missed was directly outputting the various info
>From 5151cf943987347edbc3707f08f0da8cd9f49f88 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Rishi Raj
Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2023 10:15:57 +0530
Subject: [PATCH] lto: Fixed test(U*) used but never defined error.
This Patch fixes the error during bootstrapped build.
Signed-off-by: Rishi Raj
---
gcc/lto-object.cc
Yup, I somehow missed it. Thanks, it is fixed now. Now we can test the
addition of.symtab and symbols in both builds.
Now I am moving toward the second part of the project, adding debugging
information. Right now, I am going through the documentation.
Will you recommend any other resources?
--
Hi,
I have added the patch (
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-July/623379.html ) on the
devel/bypass-asm branch.
Although I am able to build using the --disable-bootstrap option but while
doing a bootstrapped build, I am getting these errors ( as warnings while
doing the
This series of two patches enables the output of the LTO object file
without an assembler. As of now, .symtab is emitted with __gnu_lto_slim
symbol. To test, follow the instructions in the commit
message of patch 1. Also, as suggested by Honza, I am putting these patches
on devel/bypass-asm
From 50cb9df7209125f9466336d23efdd4fbeda9c4d5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: rsh-raj
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2023 16:04:48 +0530
Subject: [PATCH] MAINTAINERS file: Added myself to Write After Approval and
DCO
ChangeLog:
2023-06-30 Rishi Raj
* MAINTAINERS: Added myself to Write After Approval
On Mon, 26 Jun 2023 at 23:24, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> > > > +simple_object_write_add_symbol(simple_object_write *sobj, const char
> > > *name,
> > > > +size_t size, unsigned int align);
> > >
> > > Symbols has much more properties in addition to sizes and alignments.
> > > We will eventually need
On Sun, 25 Jun 2023 at 04:18, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> > Hi,
> Hi,
> I am sorry for late reaction.
>
No problem!
> > I am working on the GSOC project "Bypass Assembler when generating LTO
> > object files." So as a first step, I am adding .symtab along with
> > __gnu_lto_slim symbol into it so that
Hi,
I am working on the GSOC project "Bypass Assembler when generating LTO
object files." So as a first step, I am adding .symtab along with
__gnu_lto_slim symbol into it so that at a later stage, it can be
recognized that this object file has been produced using -flto enabled.
This patch is
Hi Everyone,
I am working on the GSOC project "Bypass Assembler when generating LTO
object files." My mentors and I have decided to work on the ELF files
first, so I will add .symtab along with the symbol __gnu_lto_slim to
the ELF file as a first step.
When I was going through the
Thanks to Martin, Honza, and Théo for your feedback. I have incorporated
almost all of it, updated my proposal accordingly, and submitted it.
Regarding grammar errors, I have fixed many, but there may still be some
left (I could be better at grammar, to be honest :( ).
On Tue, 4 Apr 2023 at
Sorry, I messed subject in my previous two emails :( so I am sending it
again.
I have completed a draft proposal for this project. I will appreciate Jan,
Martin, or anybody else feedback on the same.
Here is the link to my proposal
-- Forwarded message -
From: Rishi Raj
Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2023 at 05:57
Subject: Re: [GSOC] Submission of draft proposal.
To: Jan Hubicka
Cc: ,
oops, I forgot to change the subject in previous email :(
Thanks, Jan for the Reply! I have completed a draft proposal for this
project.
Thanks, Jan for the Reply! I have completed a draft proposal for this
project. I will appreciate your's, Martin's, or anybody else feedback on
the same.
Here is the link to my proposal
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1r9kzsU96kOYfIhWZx62jx4ALG-J_aJs5U0sDpwFUtts/edit?usp=sharing
On Tue, 4 Apr
While going through the patch and simple-object.c I understood that the
file simple-object.c is used to handle the object file format. However,
this file does not contain all the architecture information required for
LTO object files, so the workaround used in the patch is to read the
crtbegin.o
Hii Everyone,
I had already expressed my interest in the " Bypass assembler when
generating LTO object files" project and making a proposal for the same. I
know I should have done it earlier but I was admitted to the hospital for
past few days :(.
I have a few doubts.
1)
"One problem is that the
I am sorry for the previous messed-up reply :(. I was trying to reply back
to my previous mail thread but mistakenly replied to the entire digest::((.
Thanks, David and Martin, for the heads up, and I am sorry for the late
reply due to health issues. Anyways I could emit the warning "hello world,
;
> -- Forwarded message --
> From: David Malcolm
> To: Rishi Raj , gcc@gcc.gnu.org
> Cc:
> Bcc:
> Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2023 11:25:16 -0500
> Subject: Re: [GSOC] Looking for small patch/project to work on
> On Sat, 2023-03-04 at 08:11 +0530, Rishi Raj
Hi everyone,
My name is Rishi Raj, and I am a third-year undergraduate studying Computer
Science and Engineering at the Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur in
India. I wish to participate in this year's GSOC with GCC.
My progress so far:
1. Successfully built the GCC from source using
21 matches
Mail list logo
