search for: d20217

As a follow up to https://reviews.llvm.org/D20217 I would like to use lto/thinlto to refine when a symbol is marked as local/preemptable. I'm not very familiar with lto though so would appreciate some guidance about how best to go about this. Regards Sean Fertile

...t declarations), and indicates that despite seeing a definition, you can't assume the local version will be used. We should also have a way to do the opposite for declarations, somehow. ...(after reading more of the thread)....oh looky, that's EXACTLY what rafael's said in his patch in D20217, too. :) On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 11:01 AM, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote: > Hi everyone, > > Clang/LLVM's support for ELF interposition is in a confusing state, and I > propose making a few (hopefully simple) adjustments in order to bring our > model into a self-c...

I think that all makes sense. You're just adding the missing non-ODR conterpart of 'external' linkage. I could imagine having "external / external_odr" linkage for example. That said, do you think we should take the opportunity to split out a bit for interposability so that we can kill off the *_odr linkage variants? Today's non-ODR weak functions would look more like

Hi everyone, Clang/LLVM's support for ELF interposition is in a confusing state, and I propose making a few (hopefully simple) adjustments in order to bring our model into a self-consistent state. The problem: On ELF systems, global symbols can be interposed. This means, for example, that calls to global functions in some (shared) library defined in that same library might end up being

----- Original Message ----- > From: "James Y Knight" <jyknight at google.com> > To: "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov> > Cc: "Sanjoy Das" <sanjoy at playingwithpointers.com>, "llvm-dev" > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> > Sent: Monday, February 29, 2016 9:31:24 AM > Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] Possible soundness issue with