similar to: [LLVMdev] [lld] Overloaded Layout references

Hi, It looks like the COFF reader creates an Alias atom by adding a kindLayoutAfter reference to the target atom. Now since the kindLayoutAfter passes are moved to machO how does it still work ? Does it work by chance because of ordinals ? I would think moving kindLayoutAfter references and having the LayoutPass would be a better choice. Shankar Easwaran -- Qualcomm Innovation Center,

In r226336 I shove off 1.2 seconds out of 9.8 seconds for lld to link lld. That's done by parallelizing archive member parsing. But I realized that was not the slowest pass. The single slowest pass in LLD is LayoutPass. Only sort() at the last of Layoutpass::perform takes about 3 seconds (one third of total execution time). It is because the comparison function passed to sort, compareAtoms,

Thank you for quick responses! As to dead stripping, if dead stripping is the only pass we need bi-directional edges, we might want the dead stripping pass to construct internal data structure by reversing the graph to construct layout-before edges from layout-after edges. This should be less error prone than maintaining two reverse-directional edges throughout all passes. Of course it will make

+llvmdev On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 3:43 PM, Rui Ueyama <ruiu at google.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > I'm trying to debug an issue that LLD sometimes get into an infinite loop > in setChainRoot() in LayoutPass.cpp. It looks like the cause is either > buildPrecededByTable() handles layoutBefore edges in a wrong way or we > construct a contradictory layout-before/layout-after

Hi, I think it would be great if we could subclass the LayoutPass. All the generic functionality could be in the parent to run the layout-after/in-group/ and currently the layout-before passes(until it gets removed). Flavors can *choose to run the layout passes* that they use and determine the way things get ordered in the layout pass. The compare function in the LayoutPass would call

Hi, It looks like the the ELFPassFile doesnot get an ordinal value assigned, as its added in a pass. Is there a way to assign a file ordinal for the files added by Passes ? Till that time, I am going to XFAIL the ifunc test. More tests should fail, and am not sure why they are not failing. Thanks Shankar Easwaran -- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted

Ping ? Do you think that we need to have an API in LinkingContext to return the next ordinal available, so that files created by passes can be assigned ordinals ? Thanks Shankar Easwaran On 10/6/2013 11:07 PM, Shankar Easwaran wrote: > In addition I think the LayoutPass std::stable_sort be replaced with > std::sort as total ordering is guaranteed as each File would get an >

In addition I think the LayoutPass std::stable_sort be replaced with std::sort as total ordering is guaranteed as each File would get an ordinal and each atom would get an ordinal too, after the below problem is fixed. Thanks Shankar Easwaran On 10/6/2013 10:54 PM, Shankar Easwaran wrote: > Hi, > > It looks like the the ELFPassFile doesnot get an ordinal value > assigned, as its

Hi, Attached is the pdf of the operation to make things easier to read. Thanks Shankar Easwaran On 9/20/2013 7:04 PM, Shankar Easwaran wrote: > My email client spoilt the whole email, will create a pdf and send it. > > On 9/20/2013 7:00 PM, Shankar Easwaran wrote: >> Hi Nick, >> >> On 9/20/2013 5:59 PM, Nick Kledzik wrote: >>> On Sep 20, 2013, at 3:42 PM,

Hi Nick, Read this along with this example extract: ld -flavor gnu main.o thread.o --start-group libc.a libpthread.a --end-group function.o main.o has atoms ------------------------ main (defined) printf(undefined) fn(undefined) thread.o has atoms ----------------------------- pthread_create (undefined) libc.a(printf.o) has atoms ------------------------------------ printf(defined)

Hi Nick, Thanks for your reply. The usecase here is just trying to construct a valid ELF. The lld linker needs to handle all sorts of code written in assembly as well as 'C'. The usecase is just one example of it. I have also seen similiar code in http://lxr.free-electrons.com/source/arch/powerpc/kernel/head_32.S?a=powerpc which has global and local labels. You are right, that the

Hi Nick, Waiting for your feedback on this. Thanks Shankar Easwaran On 11/16/2012 10:03 AM, Shankar Easwaran wrote: > Hi Nick, > > Thanks for your reply. > > The usecase here is just trying to construct a valid ELF. The lld > linker needs to handle all sorts of code written in assembly as well > as 'C'. The usecase is just one example of it. > > I have also

Hi, Right now, linker added symbols specified by the -u option do not endup in the output YAML file. This is because the target specific Writers dont get called, which creates the undefined atoms. I am in the process of adding more options and I would like the atoms created internally by the options available in the output YAML file. The options that I am trying to consider for the linker

Hi, Can we add deadStrip() to undefinedAtoms as well ? This will enable to choose whether we want to set the property deadStripNormal or deadStripNever on them. Also I think it will be cleaner for atoms to be added to deadStripRoot set using a single API. Thanks Shankar Easwaran -- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by the Linux Foundation

Hi Nick, On 9/20/2013 5:59 PM, Nick Kledzik wrote: > On Sep 20, 2013, at 3:42 PM, Shankar Easwaran > <shankare at codeaurora.org> wrote: >> nextFile could pass the current resolver state at the time when its called, the linkingcontext can return the next file to be processed as below :- >> >> nextFile(currentResolverState) :- >> >> a) Returns the next

Hi Nick, Can we add a atomContentHash for DefinedAtoms when the atoms are being created. This can essentially speed up comparisons of atoms especially for * ICF (Identical code folding) * Section groups (to identify similiar sections) Not sure where else this would help. This would essentially be used only by the Reader and the Resolver. There would be no change to the

Hi Nick, --start-group/--end-group functionality with the Gnu flavor currently works only if the --start-group/--end-group contains archive files. If they contain dynamic libraries, the undefined atoms from the dynamic libraries are processed whenever the group is iterated again. I am trying to find out a way to make the resolver add undefined atoms from the shared library only *once*, when

On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 8:41 PM, Michael Spencer <bigcheesegs at gmail.com>wrote: > On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 11:23 AM, Shankar Easwaran <shankare at codeaurora.org > > wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> We have a whole bunch of readers(we would have some more too), and was >> thinking if we should have a vector of Readers, and have a function >> isMyFormat in

Hi, We have a whole bunch of readers(we would have some more too), and was thinking if we should have a vector of Readers, and have a function isMyFormat in each of them. Any reader that knows to handle, goes ahead and parses the file. On a side note, we currently use .objtxt as an figure out if the file is a YAML file or not. I have added FIXME's in the code, if we could some kind of

Hi Rui, I thought about this, but there is a catch. The undefined symbols still need to be resolved with exports from dynamic libraries even the second time, or any number of times. For example :- ld 1.o --start-group libc.so myprintf.a --end-group 1.o has a undef for myprintf, which is in myprintf.a and myprintf.a calls puts. The first time when libc.so, undef atoms would be added, no