[PATCH] D49992: [ELF][ARM] Add Arm ABI names for float ABI ELF Header flags

[Peter Smith via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

peter.smith added a comment.

In https://reviews.llvm.org/D49992#1267881, @stefson wrote:

> hey there, I've run into problems with stripping static-libs on arm when using llvm/clang-7. Could you imagine this patch being at fault?
>
>   strip: armv7a-unknown-linux-gnueabihf-strip --strip-unneeded -R .comment -R .GCC.command.line -R .note.gnu.gold-version
>       lib/libbz2.so.1.0.6
>       usr/bin/bzip2recover
>       bin/bzip2
>       usr/lib/libbz2.a
>    armv7a-unknown-linux-gnueabihf-strip: /var/tmp/portage/app-arch/bzip2-1.0.6-r10/image/usr/lib/stImUpsE/bzlib.o: Failed to find link section for section 11
>    armv7a-unknown-linux-gnueabihf-strip: /var/tmp/portage/app-arch/bzip2-1.0.6-r10/image/usr/lib/stImUpsE/bzlib.o: Failed to find link section for section 11
>
> Section 11 is: `[11] .llvm_addrsig     LOOS+0xfff4c03  00000000 003de4 000002 00   E  0   0  1`
>
> this didn't happen with llvm/clang-6, and the patch got commited within the fitting time frame?


There are quite a lot of patches that will have been committed within the clang 7 release. Please don't ping every one of them!

Thanks for posting Section 11. The address significance tables were introduced so that identical code folding can safely not fold functions that have a significant address. These were introduced in a variety of patches, one of which is https://reviews.llvm.org/D48155, I suggest searching for llvm address significance to find the rest. The thread to introduce them can be found here: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2018-May/123514.html

My guess is that the strip binary that you are using doesn't understand what a .llvm-addrsig is and is not expecting it to have a sh_link


Repository:
  rL LLVM

https://reviews.llvm.org/D49992