Displaying 9 results from an estimated 9 matches for "mpr8tvtnvn4".
2018 Jun 01
2
Proposal for address-significance tables for --icf=safe
...eply to
>> James Knight, I don't think we should block on getting a section number
>> assignment, but we can at least incorporate any design feedback from that
>> proposal.
>>
>
> I've sent the proposal: https://groups.google.com/foru
> m/#!topic/generic-abi/MPr8TVtnVn4
>
Based on feedback from the generic-abi thread I looked at the object file
size and link time impact of a few other representations for the
address-significance table. My results are here: https://groups.google.
com/d/msg/generic-abi/MPr8TVtnVn4/30Z0_KHMAQAJ
One of the proposals (a compressed...
2018 May 23
0
Proposal for address-significance tables for --icf=safe
...ric-abi. As I mentioned in my reply to
> James Knight, I don't think we should block on getting a section number
> assignment, but we can at least incorporate any design feedback from that
> proposal.
>
I've sent the proposal:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/generic-abi/MPr8TVtnVn4
Peter
>
> Peter
>
>
>
>> Happy to help out with reviews.
>>
>> Peter
>>
>>
>> On 22 May 2018 at 23:06, Peter Collingbourne via llvm-dev
>> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > Context:...
2018 Jun 01
0
Proposal for address-significance tables for --icf=safe
...Knight, I don't think we should block on getting a section number
>>> assignment, but we can at least incorporate any design feedback from that
>>> proposal.
>>>
>>
>> I've sent the proposal:
>> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/generic-abi/MPr8TVtnVn4
>>
>
> Based on feedback from the generic-abi thread I looked at the object file
> size and link time impact of a few other representations for the
> address-significance table. My results are here:
> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/generic-abi/MPr8TVtnVn4/30Z0_KHMAQAJ
>
>...
2018 Jun 01
1
Proposal for address-significance tables for --icf=safe
...we should block on getting a section number
>>>> assignment, but we can at least incorporate any design feedback from that
>>>> proposal.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I've sent the proposal: https://groups.google.com/
>>> forum/#!topic/generic-abi/MPr8TVtnVn4
>>>
>>
>> Based on feedback from the generic-abi thread I looked at the object file
>> size and link time impact of a few other representations for the
>> address-significance table. My results are here: https://groups.google.
>> com/d/msg/generic-abi/MPr8TVtn...
2018 May 23
4
Proposal for address-significance tables for --icf=safe
On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 3:25 AM, Peter Smith <peter.smith at linaro.org> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I think that the approach of using a section to record address
> significance is a good one. I'm guessing it will have its own section
> type and format? If it does would it make sense to try and submit this
> to the GABI https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/generic-abi as
2018 May 24
1
Proposal for address-significance tables for --icf=safe
...my reply to
>> James Knight, I don't think we should block on getting a section number
>> assignment, but we can at least incorporate any design feedback from that
>> proposal.
>
>
> I've sent the proposal:
> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/generic-abi/MPr8TVtnVn4
>
> Peter
Thanks. I agree we shouldn't require it to be in the GABI before
proceeding. I think making the proposal more visible to the wider
community will already have been worthwhile.
In the absence of a GABI defined way to tell if an ELF processing tool
may have broken the symbol tab...
2018 May 24
2
Proposal for address-significance tables for --icf=safe
...reply to
>> James Knight, I don't think we should block on getting a section number
>> assignment, but we can at least incorporate any design feedback from that
>> proposal.
>>
>
> I've sent the proposal:
> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/generic-abi/MPr8TVtnVn4
>
>
The proposal looks decent. I'll probably comment more once I (like the
others) get a chance to read more deeply. I've also taken a look at the
basic patches - one request is that since this is newly standardizing bits
that you make sure to comment or even put a detailed standards-...
2018 May 24
0
Proposal for address-significance tables for --icf=safe
...night, I don't think we should block on getting a section number
>>> assignment, but we can at least incorporate any design feedback from that
>>> proposal.
>>>
>>
>> I've sent the proposal: https://groups.google.com/
>> forum/#!topic/generic-abi/MPr8TVtnVn4
>>
>>
> The proposal looks decent. I'll probably comment more once I (like the
> others) get a chance to read more deeply. I've also taken a look at the
> basic patches - one request is that since this is newly standardizing bits
> that you make sure to comment or ev...
2020 Jun 24
2
[Debuginfo][DWARF][LLD] Remove obsolete debug info in lld.
Thanks for copying me in Paul! Sorry, for the late reply.
I have had a personal interest in this subject for a long time and I have
had discussions on linking DWARF with many of you in person at LLVM events.
I don't have much to add to what's upthread and James Henderson has already
answered the questions I was copied in for. However, I did want to make a
general point about ELF that I