<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#0563C1;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#954F72;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="#0563C1" vlink="#954F72">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal">I filed <a href="https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=42273">
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=42273</a> last night, about an inconsistency between LTO and non-LTO workflows.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The basic scenario is that we have an object file which calls a function “foo”, a static library that provides an implementation of “foo”, and a shared library that also provides an implementation of “foo”. Currently, whether lld chooses
the symbol from the static library or the shared library depends on the order the files are specified on the command-line. For “obj.o static.a shared.so”, or “static.a obj.o shared.so”, lld chooses the symbol from the static library. For any other order,
it chooses the symbol from the shared library. Is this the expected behavior? (As far as I can tell, this matches binutils ld except for the “static.a obj.o shared.so” case.)<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">If “obj.o” is built with LTO enabled, and the function is specifically a runtime function, the behavior is different. For example, suppose the IR contains a call to “llvm.memcpy”, and the generated code eventually calls “memcpy”. Or suppose
the IR contains a “resume” instruction, and the generated code eventually calls “_Unwind_Resume”. In this case, the choice is different: lld always chooses the “memcpy” or “_Unwind_Resume” from the shared library, ignoring the order the files are specified
on the command-line. Is this the expected behavior?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">-Eli<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>