[PATCH] D28626: RFC: Generalize inverted gc dependencies

[Robert Lytton via llvm-commits]

yes, sorry, I realised that on the way home!
No, we don't - they are opaque.
Please do refactor appropriately - thank you.
robert


________________________________________
From: Rafael Avila de Espindola [rafael.espindola at gmail.com]
Sent: 24 January 2017 19:11
To: Robert Lytton; reviews+D28626+public+0a7e58a8570fa72f at reviews.llvm.org; rnk at google.com; eugenis at google.com; peter at pcc.me.uk; ruiu at google.com
Cc: chisophugis at gmail.com; llvm-commits at lists.llvm.org
Subject: RE: [PATCH] D28626: RFC: Generalize inverted gc dependencies

Robert Lytton <robert at xmos.com> writes:

> Yes, the assembler (and linker) use the XCORE_SHF_DP_SECTION and
> XCORE_SHF_CP_SECTION values viz 'd' and 'c' are in the ABI for the section.

Sorry, I ment these values:

  /// XCORE_SHF_CP_SECTION - All sections with the "c" flag are grouped
  /// together by the linker to form the constant pool and the cp register is
  /// set to the start of the constant pool by the boot code.
  XCORE_SHF_CP_SECTION = 0x800U,

  /// XCORE_SHF_DP_SECTION - All sections with the "d" flag are grouped
  /// together by the linker to form the data section and the dp register is
  /// set to the start of the section by the boot code.
  XCORE_SHF_DP_SECTION = 0x1000U,

They are invalid since they are not in the SHF_MASKPROC.

Cheers,
Rafael