similar to: [LLVMdev] broken binutils

On 6/16/07, David A. Greene <greened at obbligato.org> wrote: > Just FYI, we discovered that GNU binutils 2.17 has a nasty bug in the > linker that causes excessive link time when building llvm. We switched > to using cvs binutils and our link times went from minutes to seconds. > > I didn't see anything about this on the web pages. It might be good > information to

2013/10/23 Rafael Espíndola <rafael.espindola at gmail.com> > > Sorry for the unclear statements, I didn't means the assembler to mangle > > symbols declared in assembly source files, I means directly use assembly > > directive to choice which symbol should be used. The compiler just need > to > > follow the directive. > > For example, in assembly

On May 26, 2009, at 10:52 AM, Rafael Espindola wrote: > Today support for plugins has been committed to BFD. That is the file > format abstraction library used by binutils. This now works Very nice Rafael! Can you please update the web page to mention this, e.g. in the LinkTimeOptimization.html document and wherever else relevant? -Chris > > $ llvm-gcc -emit-llvm -O2 -c a.c

I believe it's a feature missing in MC - https://github.com/opensource-apple/cctools/blob/4da58fd2fc026317ed9e9ef1feabf21ed0bb7a81/cctools-836/as/i386.c line 539 adds support for the .bss directive if certain variables are defined, and mainline gas supports it on all ARM targets: https://sourceware.org/binutils/docs/as/ARM-Directives.html . Supporting the directive on all Darwin targets could

LGTM On 29 September 2013 06:08, Nicholas White <n.j.white at gmail.com> wrote: > I believe it's a feature missing in MC - > https://github.com/opensource-apple/cctools/blob/4da58fd2fc026317ed9e9ef1feabf21ed0bb7a81/cctools-836/as/i386.c > line 539 adds support for the .bss directive if certain variables are > defined, and mainline gas supports it on all ARM targets: >

Thanks - how would I go about getting this committed? Nick On 30 September 2013 13:50, Rafael Espíndola <rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote: > LGTM > > On 29 September 2013 06:08, Nicholas White <n.j.white at gmail.com> wrote: >> I believe it's a feature missing in MC - >>

> Sorry for the unclear statements, I didn't means the assembler to mangle > symbols declared in assembly source files, I means directly use assembly > directive to choice which symbol should be used. The compiler just need to > follow the directive. > For example, in assembly files, there is a directive > https://sourceware.org/binutils/docs-2.23.1/as/If.html#If > to act

That's pretty awesome! Will ar, etc. eventually get some autodiscovery of plugins so that things work OOTB after a make install of llvm/llvm-gcc? - Daniel On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 10:52 AM, Rafael Espindola<espindola at google.com> wrote: > For some time now the gold linker has support for plugins and llvm has > a plugin for it. > > Unfortunately, it was still not possible

> It is the same error message . > > Can you tell me which gcc version are you using to compile the llvm chain, > and also the binutils svn version number? I have used both gcc 4.2 and 4.4. > I noticed the dlopen is inside /lib/ld-linux.so.2, and my version of glibc > is 2.5, is this too old? I don't think that is the problem. I have just posted a patch to gold

For some time now the gold linker has support for plugins and llvm has a plugin for it. Unfortunately, it was still not possible to do fully transparent LTO on linux because ar had no support for plugins and a library created with llvm files in it would have no symbol table and would be rejected by gold. Today support for plugins has been committed to BFD. That is the file format abstraction

Hello! I have encountered a problem when building shared klibc with recent binutils versions - apparently the breakage happened since binutils 2.17.50.0.2 due to the following change: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/binutils/2006-05/msg00279.html http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2006-05/msg00466.html --- a/binutils/bfd/elf64-x86-64.c +++ b/binutils/bfd/elf64-x86-64.c @@ -3630,7 +3630,8 @@ static

Hi Mehdi, Should I apply your attached patch on my llvm3.8 source firstly? Or should I use the latest llvm SVN trunk instead? Steven Shi Intel\SSG\STO\UEFI Firmware Tel: +86 021-61166522 iNet: 821-6522 From: mehdi.amini at apple.com [mailto:mehdi.amini at apple.com] Sent: Monday, May 30, 2016 2:13 PM To: Shi, Steven <steven.shi at intel.com> Cc: Umesh Kalappa <umesh.kalappa0 at

On 05/30/16 01:34 PM, Rafael Espíndola <rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote: > > We don't use cl::opt in gold, instead we parse the -plugin-opts that > gold passes the plugin (see process_plugin_option). > What about that: $ grep ParseCommandLineOptions tools/gold/gold-plugin.cpp // ParseCommandLineOptions () expects argv[0] to be program name. Lazily cl::

2009/7/7 Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com>: > > On May 26, 2009, at 10:52 AM, Rafael Espindola wrote: >> >> Today support for plugins has been committed to BFD. That is the file >> format abstraction library used by binutils. This now works > > Very nice Rafael!  Can you please update the web page to mention this, e.g. > in the LinkTimeOptimization.html

Hi Steven, > On May 29, 2016, at 11:28 PM, Shi, Steven <steven.shi at intel.com> wrote: > > Hi Mehdi, > Should I apply your attached patch on my llvm3.8 source firstly? Or should I use the latest llvm SVN trunk instead? I wrote it on trunk, but I expect it to be fairly easy to port on 3.8. This is really just quickly plumbing an option on the TargetMachine creation. --

On 2013.11.15 at 12:49 -0500, Rafael Espíndola wrote: > On 15 November 2013 11:30, Stephen Checkoway <s at pahtak.org> wrote: > > > > On Nov 15, 2013, at 11:16 AM, Rafael Espíndola <rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> Taking a really quick at the gold code it looks like it tries to keep > >> 8176 files open. I would suggest putting a

(And I doubt the GNU linker supports LTO with LLVM). [Steven]: I’ve pushed GNU Binutils ld to support LLVM gold plugin, see detail in this bug https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20070. The new GNU ld linker works well with LLVM/Clang LTO when build IA32 code in my side. And from the ld owner input in the bug comments, the current X64 LLVM LTO issue is in llvm LTO plugin. The fact

> On May 29, 2016, at 5:44 PM, Shi, Steven <steven.shi at intel.com> wrote: > > (And I doubt the GNU linker supports LTO with LLVM). > [Steven]: I’ve pushed GNU Binutils ld to support LLVM gold plugin, see detail in this bug https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20070 <https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20070>. The new GNU ld linker works well with

On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 1:38 AM, Rafael Espindola<espindola at google.com> wrote: > 2009/7/12 Daniel Dunbar <daniel at zuster.org>: >> Will ar, etc. eventually get some autodiscovery of plugins so that >> things work OOTB after a make install of llvm/llvm-gcc? > > The bfd library (used by ar and nm) already searches for plugins in >

We don't use cl::opt in gold, instead we parse the -plugin-opts that gold passes the plugin (see process_plugin_option). Cheers, Rafael On 30 May 2016 at 02:13, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: > > On May 29, 2016, at 5:44 PM, Shi, Steven <steven.shi at intel.com> wrote: > > (And I doubt the GNU linker supports LTO with LLVM). > [Steven]: I’ve pushed