[PATCH] D27040: [ELF] - Add support for access to most of synthetic sections from linkerscript.
Rui Ueyama via llvm-commits
llvm-commits at lists.llvm.org
Thu Nov 24 10:06:36 PST 2016
ruiu added inline comments.
================
Comment at: ELF/SyntheticSections.cpp:1589-1590
+template <class ELFT> bool VersionTableSection<ELFT>::empty() const {
+ bool HasVerNeed = In<ELFT>::VerNeed->getNeedNum() != 0;
+ return !In<ELFT>::VerDef && !HasVerNeed;
+}
----------------
grimar wrote:
> ruiu wrote:
> > grimar wrote:
> > > ruiu wrote:
> > > > grimar wrote:
> > > > > ruiu wrote:
> > > > > > I don't understand these conditions. Is this the same as the code below?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > if (!In<ELFT>::Verdef)
> > > > > > return true;
> > > > > > return In<ELFT>::VerNeed->empty();
> > > > > It is the same as:
> > > > >
> > > > > ```
> > > > > template <class ELFT> bool VersionTableSection<ELFT>::empty() const {
> > > > > return !In<ELFT>::VerDef && In<ELFT>::VerNeed->empty();
> > > > > }
> > > > > ```
> > > > So, you meant VersionTable is empty if
> > > >
> > > > - we have a VerDef section,
> > > > - and VerNeed is empty.
> > > >
> > > > But why?
> > > Mmm, no, it is empty if
> > > - we **do not** have Verdef
> > > - and VerNeed is empty.
> > >
> > >
> > Then
> >
> > if (In<ELFT>::VerDef == nullptr)
> > return true;
> > return In<ELFT>::VerNeed->empty();
> >
> > This is the same code as I wrote in the first comment.
> No, because your code will return **empty** if we **do not** have Verdef but **have** entries in VerNeed
I don't know what you are doing here is right, I need to take a look at the original code. Anyways, can you rewrite this code so that it is easy to understand?
https://reviews.llvm.org/D27040
More information about the llvm-commits
mailing list