<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=us-ascii"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class="">Hi Michael, William,<div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">William - thank you very much for this!</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">If possible, could you please add an ELF test case to llvm/test/ExecutionEngine/RuntimeDyld/ARM? There is an existing MachO test case there that may be of some help, though it does not contain any GOT relocation tests. From the x86-64 GOT test:</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><font face="Courier New" class=""># Test PC-rel GOT relocation.<br class=""># Verify both the contents of the GOT entry for y, and that the movq instruction<br class=""># references the correct GOT entry address:<br class=""># rtdyld-check: *{8}(stub_addr(test_x86-64.o, __text, y)) = y<br class=""># rtdyld-check: decode_operand(insn3, 4) = stub_addr(test_x86-64.o, __text, y) - next_pc(insn3)<br class="">insn3:<br class=""> movq y@GOTPCREL(%rip), %rax<br class=""></font><br class=""></div><div class="">The first test is reading the value of the stub (in this case GOT entry) for y and verifying that it contains the address of y.</div><div class="">The second test is verifying that the PC-relative offset for the instruction is equal to the difference between the stub address and the next instruction.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Cheers,</div><div class="">Lang.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Mar 22, 2016, at 12:58 PM, Michael Gottesman <<a href="mailto:mgottesman@apple.com" class="">mgottesman@apple.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><div class="">I am not actually reviewing this, but just as a drive by: This is definitely going to need tests.<br class=""><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class="">On Mar 22, 2016, at 12:56 PM, Michael Gottesman via llvm-commits <<a href="mailto:llvm-commits@lists.llvm.org" class="">llvm-commits@lists.llvm.org</a>> wrote:<br class=""><br class="">Lang, can you take a look at this one?<br class=""><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class="">On Mar 22, 2016, at 10:59 AM, William Dillon via llvm-commits <<a href="mailto:llvm-commits@lists.llvm.org" class="">llvm-commits@lists.llvm.org</a>> wrote:<br class=""><br class=""><llvm.patch>This change supports the swift interpreter on armv7-based linux machines. This is required for a number of tests and the package manager.<br class=""><br class="">- Will_______________________________________________<br class="">llvm-commits mailing list<br class=""><a href="mailto:llvm-commits@lists.llvm.org" class="">llvm-commits@lists.llvm.org</a><br class="">http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-commits<br class=""></blockquote><br class="">_______________________________________________<br class="">llvm-commits mailing list<br class=""><a href="mailto:llvm-commits@lists.llvm.org" class="">llvm-commits@lists.llvm.org</a><br class="">http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-commits<br class=""></blockquote><br class=""></div></div></blockquote></div><br class=""></div></body></html>