[lld] r229762 - PECOFF: Fix symbol aliases

[Rui Ueyama]

I know you wanted to bring LayoutPass back, and I think I described about
why that's not a good idea many times. The most recent discussion is this.
Could you read this and then elaborate why you think we should use the
LayoutPass based on that discussion?

http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2015-February/082130.html

On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 6:06 PM, Shankar Easwaran <shankare at codeaurora.org>
wrote:

> I feel using kindLayoutBefore references would be a preferred way for this
> solution.
>
> We could enable the LayoutPass only if Alias symbols exist. Does COFF need
> alias symbols for default operation ?
>
> Shankar Easwaran
>
>
> On 2/18/2015 5:50 PM, Rui Ueyama wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 3:47 PM, Shankar Easwaran <
>> shankare at codeaurora.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>  On 2/18/2015 5:11 PM, Rui Ueyama wrote:
>>>
>>>  +  alias->setOrdinal(target->ordinal() - 1);
>>>>
>>>>  Wouldn't this cause a wrap around when the ordinal of the first atom
>>> is 0 ?
>>>
>>>     +// getNextOrdinal returns a monotonically increasaing uint64_t
>>>> number
>>>> +// starting from 1. There's a large gap between two numbers returned
>>>> +// from this function, so that you can put other atoms between them.
>>>> +uint64_t FileCOFF::getNextOrdinal() {
>>>> +  return _ordinal++ << 32;
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>>
>>>>  Do you need it this to be shifted by 32 ? Wouldnt incrementing by 2 be
>>> enough ?
>>>
>>
>> You could define two or more aliases to a symbol so we need more room than
>> for one alias. That doesn't work now, though.
>>
>>
>>
>>> Shankar Easwaran
>>>
>>> --
>>> Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted
>>> by the Linux Foundation
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
> --
> Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted
> by the Linux Foundation
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/attachments/20150218/f8171733/attachment.html>