Displaying 8 results from an estimated 8 matches for "dprotivensky".
Did you mean:
protivensky
2015 Feb 25
2
[LLVMdev] [lld] Undefined symbols postprocessing
...cases other than static linking of the executable?
- Denis.
On 02/24/2015 06:44 AM, Nick Kledzik wrote:
On Feb 23, 2015, at 2:52 PM, Michael Spencer <bigcheesegs at gmail.com><mailto:bigcheesegs at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 10:40 PM, Denis Protivensky
> <dprotivensky at accesssoftek.com><mailto:dprotivensky at accesssoftek.com> wrote:
>> Shankar,
>>
>> Okay, I guessed the correct interface.
>> But what about the moment at which the function is called?
>> If it's called from Resolver::resolve(), it doesn't make any...
2015 Feb 23
2
[LLVMdev] [lld] Undefined symbols postprocessing
On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 10:40 PM, Denis Protivensky
<dprotivensky at accesssoftek.com> wrote:
> Shankar,
>
> Okay, I guessed the correct interface.
> But what about the moment at which the function is called?
> If it's called from Resolver::resolve(), it doesn't make any difference to
> me as I cannot determine the need of specific sy...
2015 Feb 18
6
[LLVMdev] [lld] Undefined symbols postprocessing
Hi everyone,
In lld, I need to conditionally add symbols (like GLOBAL_OFFSET_TABLE)
during
static linking because they may be used by relocations (R_ARM_TLS_IE32) or
by some other stuff like STT_GNU_IFUNC symbols.
The problem is that now symbols are added in a declarative way by
specifying in ExecutableWriter::addDefaultAtoms() override.
At that stage, there's no way to determine if
2015 Feb 09
2
[LLVMdev] [lld] Representation of lld::Reference with a fake target
...LLD about how to
> emit a re-linkable object file in YAML or Native file. But the round-trip
> tests do more than that, right? The tests require more -- dumping linker
> internal state to a file and reading it correctly.
>
> On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 4:33 AM, Denis Protivensky <
> dprotivensky at accesssoftek.com> wrote:
>
>> A bit off topic: ARM Group relocations define a logical set of consequent
>> instructions to be relocated to form one single address. For such
>> relocations a 1 to 1 relation is also met, so no need of special processing
>> in applyR...
2015 Feb 09
2
[LLVMdev] [lld] Representation of lld::Reference with a fake target
A bit off topic: ARM Group relocations define a logical set of consequent instructions to be relocated to form one single address. For such relocations a 1 to 1 relation is also met, so no need of special processing in applyRelocation.
Concerning native format: it also introduced unneeded code complexity to me when I wanted to set calculated relocation addend back into the Reference object in the
2015 Feb 19
4
[LLVMdev] [lld] Undefined symbols postprocessing
+ Nick
On 2/19/2015 9:00 AM, Shankar Easwaran wrote:
> On 2/19/2015 3:58 AM, Denis Protivensky wrote:
>> Joerg:
>>> I propose to add the ability to ignore undefined symbols during initial
>>> resolution, and then postprocess only those undefines for the second
>>> time
>>> after the pass manager execution.
>> Do you want to do that before or
2015 Feb 19
3
[LLVMdev] [lld] Undefined symbols postprocessing
Joerg:
> I propose to add the ability to ignore undefined symbols during initial
> resolution, and then postprocess only those undefines for the second time
> after the pass manager execution.
Do you want to do that before or after dead code elimination?
I think dead code elimination should be performed after all possible object code modifications done by lld. Therefore, it should be
2015 Jan 12
2
[LLVMdev] [lld] ARM/Thumb atom forming
Thanks, Shankar.
I needed to override all the places where st_value had been used, and it worked.
But there another problem appeared: after correcting all atoms, I cannot distinguish between ARM and Thumb symbols in the further stages when fixing up relocations.
I used to check targetVAddress (in terms of the relocation handler) since it contained 1 in the least bit when addressing Thumb