[PATCH] [Core] Do not reclaim absolute atoms in resolver

Rui Ueyama ruiu at google.com
Mon Feb 23 11:02:54 PST 2015


On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 10:59 AM, Shankar Kalpathi Easwaran <
shankarke at gmail.com> wrote:

> I feel its a bug in GNU on why absolute symbols are not reclaimed. Do we
> want to be bug compatible with lld ?
>
> cat > 1.c << \!
> int foo() { return 0; }
> !
>
> cat > 2.c << \!
> int bar() { return 0; }
> !
>
> gcc -c 1.c 2.c
> ld 1.o 2.o -e foo --gc-sections
>
> nothing in bar is used, but still there is an absolute symbol, confuses me.
>

Where is an absolute symbol in the above code?


>
>
> http://reviews.llvm.org/D7823
>
> EMAIL PREFERENCES
>   http://reviews.llvm.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/attachments/20150223/553e08cc/attachment.html>


More information about the llvm-commits mailing list