[PATCH] D60189: [llvm-objcopy] Simplify SHT_NOBITS -> SHT_PROGBITS promotion

[James Henderson via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

jhenderson added a comment.

I don't feel strongly about this change either way. I think it is correct in the sense that it does what it sets out to achieve, but I have no opinion on whether we should aim for compatibility here. I do agree that non-alloc nobits sections makes no sense, but could there be a crazy build system where somebody modifies the flags in different runs, relying on the later run to add the SHF_ALLOC section?



================
Comment at: tools/llvm-objcopy/ELF/ELFObjcopy.cpp:104
+  // may promote more non-ALLOC sections than GNU objcopy, but it is fine as
+  // non-ALLOC SHT_NOBITS do not make much sense.
+  if (Sec.Type == SHT_NOBITS &&
----------------
I'd put "sections" between "SHT_NOBITS" and "do" here.


Repository:
  rL LLVM

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D60189/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D60189