[lld] r238115 - [ELF] Fix lld when no unique sections is used

Rafael EspĂ­ndola rafael.espindola at gmail.com
Thu May 28 22:07:09 PDT 2015

On May 28, 2015 6:55 PM, "Sean Silva" <chisophugis at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 9:19 PM, Rafael EspĂ­ndola <
rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > It sort of got lost among the other points, but this was meant to be
>> > accompanied by "and if the binary is created with yaml2obj anyway, why
>> > just check in the yaml?"
>> So, there may be a line between the two groups where yaml is the
>> easiest way to create a test. So lets say you are reading the code,
>> notice something odd and decide to try create a file that will hit an
>> assert. Depending on what that assert is, yaml2obj might be the tool
>> for the job (or llvm-mc, or an hex editor depending on the assert).
>> But most cases I have seen yaml2obj mentioned are for cases that
>> someone chanced upon a file that causes an issue and now is trying to
>> figure out a way to recreate it with yaml2obj. Since we will always
>> want to do something reasonable with that file, why not check it in?
> The same reason we generally reduce all other testcases before checking
them in? I don't see how this is any different.

The test is two  .section directives and a relocation in .s. Trying to
force it to yaml is just a waste of time.

> -- Sean Silva
>> This patch was just one such case: the patch was written fixing an
>> issue on a file that was trivial to create: compile a file with two
>> functions using -ffunction-sections -fno-unique-section-names.
>> Cheers,
>> Rafael
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/attachments/20150529/9ac67c77/attachment.html>

More information about the llvm-commits mailing list