[PATCH] [lld][core] sectionGroup support.

[Michael Spencer]

On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 2:14 PM, Rafael Espíndola
<rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote:
>> It appears that the linker needs to deal with two namespaces, and think its
>> best to consider the group signature separately from the other atoms. We
>> could have an additional map in the Resolver that would just handle
>> resolution for groups ?
>
> It is probably a good idea. The part of the linker deciding to load or
> not a group only needs to checks those symbols. The rest of the linker
> never needs to check those symbols. Cases like the simple inline c++
> function would just happen to be in both tables.
>
> Cheers,
> Rafael

>From what I understand, there is nothing special about signature
symbols. They are just a way to give a name to a group and participate
in linking as normal.

Are you saying that we have a separate table that represents groups in
addition to leaving all the symbols in the normal symbol table?

Group resolution seems to only matter for comdat groups. Non-comdat
groups just need references to properly model dead stripping.

- Michael Spencer