[PATCH] D35595: Bring back r307364

[Shoaib Meenai via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

smeenai added a comment.

> (from @rafael's email) Correct, bfd complains. That is why you have to make foo weak, which is annoying.

Okay, that makes sense. Are we not necessarily trying to mimic bfd's behavior then?

I'm slightly confused in general (and I apologize for jumping in without having the full context, but I've had to deal a bunch of symbol versioning issues internally, and I'm also working on switching things over to LLD, so I want to make sure I understand LLD's intended behavior for versioning). From what I understand, this patch is meant to restore https://reviews.llvm.org/D35059 while fixing the case in https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33820. Shouldn't there be an additional test case for the issue in that bug? As far as I can see the test cases here are the same as the ones from https://reviews.llvm.org/D35059.



================
Comment at: ELF/SymbolTable.cpp:246
+
+    // This is for the case where the link has both foo and foo at ver.
+    // The reason this happens is because given
----------------
This is meant to address the case from https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33820, right?


https://reviews.llvm.org/D35595