search for: fvisibility

...> > @@ -245,17 +246,13 @@ if test "x$GCC" = xyes; then > AC_MSG_RESULT([yes]), > [CFLAGS="$save_CFLAGS -Wmissing-prototypes"; > AC_MSG_RESULT([no])]); > + CFLAGS=$save_CFLAGS > > # Enable -fvisibility=hidden if using a gcc that supports it Can you restore this comment with a general pointer to "...compiler that support it". BTW, what is the compiler option called for clang to suppress visibility(-hiden) feature - ... -fvisibility=no ? I would like to test w/o your patches. - Sedat -...

...verflow.com/questions/19496643/ ------------------------------------------------- This is a scaled down version of a problem I am facing with clang++ on Mac OS X. The failure =========== I have this big piece of software in C++ with a large set of symbols in the object files, so I'm using `-fvisibility=hidden` to keep my symbol tables small. It is well known that in such a case one must pay extra attention to the vtables, and I suppose I face this problem. I don't know however, how to address it elegantly in a way that pleases both gcc and clang. Consider a `base` class which features a do...

Hi, I am using latest sources on GCC (gcc4.5_branch), LLVM and dragonegg. I am able to build all three bits though unsuccessfull in building. Already done obvious things - checked out the sources as per defined in "Getting the development version" on dragonegg.llvm.org - Modified the llvm-backend.cpp in dragonegg to make available the global plugin_is_GPL_compatible publically -

After trying the recommended use of -O4 -fvisibility=hidden to compile xplor-nih with full LTO optimizations, I discovered three symbols become undefined... llvm-gcc-4 -O4 -fvisibility=hidden -o xplor xplor.o \ \ -L. -lxplorCmd -lxplor -L/Users/howarth/xplor-nih-2.21/bin.Darwin_9_x86/ -lfft -lintVar -lvmd -lpy -lswigpy-xplor -ltclXplor -lswi...

Le 25 janv. 09 à 06:01, Jack Howarth a écrit : > After trying the recommended use of -O4 -fvisibility=hidden to > compile xplor-nih with full LTO optimizations, I discovered three > symbols become undefined... > > llvm-gcc-4 -O4 -fvisibility=hidden -o xplor xplor.o \ > \ > -L. -lxplorCmd -lxplor -L/Users/howarth/xplor-nih-2.21/ > bin.Darwin_9_x86/ -lfft -lintVar -lvmd...

...dynamically loaded. // extern "C" void initspy() +__attribute__((visibility("default"))); + +extern "C" void initspy() { this_module = Py_InitModule("spy", sparky_methods); Py_XINCREF(this_module); Tk/Python driven software appears very friendly to -fvisibility=hidden. Are there any particular optimization options that one should use besides -O4 -fvisibility=hidden to enable all of the possible llvm Link Time Optimizations? Also, I assume that one only needs to compile the object files with -O4 -fvisibility=hidden and that the actual linkage doesn't n...

...g > > > > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev Devang, I was surprised to discover that I could build all of pymol with -fvisibility=hidden using gcc 4.4 or llvm-gcc-4.2 with only a single header change... --- pymol-1.1/layer4/Cmd.h.orig 2009-01-30 18:58:58.000000000 -0500 +++ pymol-1.1/layer4/Cmd.h 2009-01-30 19:00:17.000000000 -0500 @@ -18,7 +18,8 @@ #include"os_python.h" -void init_cmd(void); +void init_c...

Hi Rehman, if I understand right the plugin works fine if you compile it with -fvisibility=hidden, and replace LLVM_GLOBAL_VISIBILITY in llvm-backend.cpp with __attribute__ ((visibility("default"))). Since LLVM_GLOBAL_VISIBILITY is a macro that expands to __attribute__ ((visibility("default"))) if you are not on mingw32 or cygwin, and your gcc version is at least 4,...

...Mesa/src/mesa/drivers/dri/nouveau' gcc -c -I. -I../../../../../src/mesa/drivers/dri/common -Iserver -I../../../../../include -I../../../../../src/mesa -I../../../../../src/egl/main -I../../../../../src/egl/drivers/dri -I/usr/include/drm -g -O2 -Wall -Wmissing-prototypes -std=c99 -ffast-math -fvisibility=hidden -fno-strict-aliasing -fPIC -DUSE_X86_ASM -DUSE_MMX_ASM -DUSE_3DNOW_ASM -DUSE_SSE_ASM -D_GNU_SOURCE -DPTHREADS -DHAVE_POSIX_MEMALIGN -DUSE_EXTERNAL_DXTN_LIB=1 -DIN_DRI_DRIVER -DGLX_DIRECT_RENDERING -DGLX_INDIRECT_RENDERING -DHAVE_ALIAS -DHAVE_XEXTPROTO_71 -I/usr/include/drm -I/usr/include/n...

On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 11:38:48AM +0100, Jean-Daniel Dupas wrote: > > Le 25 janv. 09 à 06:01, Jack Howarth a écrit : > > > After trying the recommended use of -O4 -fvisibility=hidden to > > compile xplor-nih with full LTO optimizations, I discovered three > > symbols become undefined... > > > > llvm-gcc-4 -O4 -fvisibility=hidden -o xplor xplor.o \ > > \ > > -L. -lxplorCmd -lxplor -L/Users/howarth/xplor-nih-2.21/ > > bin....

Patch 1 adds a check for the compilers visibility macro to configure.ac. Patch 2 avoids redefined symbol errors in clang of the tls entry points. Based on a suggestion from Rafael Ávila de Espíndola <rafael.espindola at gmail.com> in http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=19778. Tested with gcc 4.9 and clang 3.6(rc) Marc Dietrich (2): configure: add visibility macro detection to configure

...bug report on this: ============================================================== > install.packages("nlme") ((several lines removed)) * Installing *source* package 'nlme' ... ** libs i686-pc-linux-gnu-gcc -I/usr/lib/R/include -I/usr/lib/R/include -I/usr/local/include -fvisibility=hidden -fPIC -O2 -mcpu=i686 -pipe -std=gnu99 -c corStruct.c -o corStruct.o cc1: error: unrecognized option `-fvisibility=hidden' make: *** [corStruct.o] Error 1 ERROR: compilation failed for package 'nlme' ============================================================== Here's my c...

...> @@ -245,17 +246,13 @@ if test "x$GCC" = xyes; then > AC_MSG_RESULT([yes]), > [CFLAGS="$save_CFLAGS -Wmissing-prototypes"; > AC_MSG_RESULT([no])]); > + CFLAGS=$save_CFLAGS > I'm not sure we want/need this one ? > # Enable -fvisibility=hidden if using a gcc that supports it As spotted by Sedat, please update the comment. > - save_CFLAGS="$CFLAGS" > - AC_MSG_CHECKING([whether $CC supports -fvisibility=hidden]) > - VISIBILITY_CFLAGS="-fvisibility=hidden" > - CFLAGS="$CFLAGS $VISIBIL...

...works around a layering violation. Can you provide the cmake line that produces a broken build? Cheers, Rafael On Jun 18, 2016 7:34 AM, "Nicolai Hähnle" <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: Hi, since recently I'm getting linker failures in debug builds. The root cause is that -fvisibility-inlines-hidden causes inline functions in explicit template instantiations to become hidden in certain cases. The following hunk works around this... --- a/cmake/modules/HandleLLVMOptions.cmake +++ b/cmake/modules/HandleLLVMOptions.cmake @@ -159,7 +159,13 @@ endif() if(NOT WIN32 AND NOT CYGWIN)...

On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 9:48 AM, Thierry Reding <thierry.reding at gmail.com> wrote: > From: Thierry Reding <treding at nvidia.com> > > Checks whether or not the compiler supports the -fvisibility option. If > so it sets the VISIBILITY_CFLAGS variable which can be added to the per > directory AM_CFLAGS where appropriate. > > By default all symbols will be hidden via the VISIBILITY_CFLAGS. The > drm_public macro can be used to mark symbols that should be exported. hmm, maybe d...

...e was being spent in the linker resolving weak symbols. At least on Darwin, this was actually the dominant factor in our startup time. Our use of C++ means that by default we tend to have quite a few weak symbols in our binaries. There are two ways to reduce this startup cost, one start is to use -fvisibility-inlines-hidden for compilers which support it (GCC). This marks inline member functions as hidden which means they do not appear as weak external symbols in the final linked image. The second is to use an explicit list of exports which is provided to the linker. For applications like llvm-as which...

On 30/07/14 11:16, Christian K?nig wrote: > [CCing Emil as well] > > Am 30.07.2014 um 11:38 schrieb Maarten Lankhorst: >> Using -export-symbols-regex all private symbols are hidden, resulting in the >> following changes: > > Wasn't "-export-symbols-regex" exactly that stuff we are trying to avoid in mesa? > IMHO we should try to pick up Thierry

On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 08:34:03PM +0200, Akim Demaille wrote: > > Le 5 juin 2014 à 00:32, Rafael Espíndola <rafael.espindola at gmail.com> a écrit : > > > I think the difference is actually in the c++ library. It looks like > > libstdc++ changed to always use strcmp of the typeinfo names: > > > >

...a proper way to work-around this difference in behavior between libstdc++ and libc++. My code base depends on a lot of third party libraries and patching those with visibility-attributes is beyond the scope of what I can do. Are there any other options for making libc++ work on linux when using -fvisibility=hidden? I'm building llvm/clang/libc++ from head-of-tree. /J > Joerg > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev > ------------...

Le 5 juin 2014 à 00:32, Rafael Espíndola <rafael.espindola at gmail.com> a écrit : > I think the difference is actually in the c++ library. It looks like > libstdc++ changed to always use strcmp of the typeinfo names: > > https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs/gcc?view=revision&revision=149964 > > Should we do the same with libc++? What do people think about this issue?