Em Wed, Oct 09, 2019 at 04:07:37PM -0700, Ian Rogers escreveu:
> On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 5:31 AM Jiri Olsa wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 05:36:23PM -0700, Ian Rogers wrote:
> > > Being const + weak breaks with some compilers that constant-propagate
> > > from the weak symbol. This behavior is
On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 5:31 AM Jiri Olsa wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 05:36:23PM -0700, Ian Rogers wrote:
> > Being const + weak breaks with some compilers that constant-propagate
> > from the weak symbol. This behavior is outside of the specification, but
> > in LLVM is chosen to match
On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 05:36:23PM -0700, Ian Rogers wrote:
> Being const + weak breaks with some compilers that constant-propagate
> from the weak symbol. This behavior is outside of the specification, but
> in LLVM is chosen to match GCC's behavior.
>
> LLVM's implementation was set in this
On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 5:36 PM 'Ian Rogers' via Clang Built Linux
wrote:
>
> Being const + weak breaks with some compilers that constant-propagate
> from the weak symbol. This behavior is outside of the specification, but
> in LLVM is chosen to match GCC's behavior.
>
> LLVM's implementation was
Being const + weak breaks with some compilers that constant-propagate
from the weak symbol. This behavior is outside of the specification, but
in LLVM is chosen to match GCC's behavior.
LLVM's implementation was set in this patch:
5 matches
Mail list logo