similar to: Any LLD guarantees on section alignment across TUs?

So I was looking into handling ELF groups today in the Atom model. It appears that we will need to add the concept of a group to the atom model directly, as modeling it with references fails to capture some semantics. http://www.sco.com/developers/gabi/latest/ch4.sheader.html Groups in ELF are collections of sections that must be either included or excluded as a unit. They also are used to

On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 4:43 PM, Nick Kledzik <kledzik at apple.com> wrote: > > On Dec 19, 2012, at 4:25 PM, Michael Spencer wrote: > >> So I was looking into handling ELF groups today in the Atom model. It >> appears that we will need to add the concept of a group to the atom >> model directly, as modeling it with references fails to capture some >>

On Dec 19, 2012, at 4:25 PM, Michael Spencer wrote: > So I was looking into handling ELF groups today in the Atom model. It > appears that we will need to add the concept of a group to the atom > model directly, as modeling it with references fails to capture some > semantics. > > http://www.sco.com/developers/gabi/latest/ch4.sheader.html > > Groups in ELF are

On Dec 19, 2012, at 4:53 PM, Michael Spencer wrote: > On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 4:43 PM, Nick Kledzik <kledzik at apple.com> wrote: >> >> On Dec 19, 2012, at 4:25 PM, Michael Spencer wrote: >>> So I was looking into handling ELF groups today in the Atom model. It >>> appears that we will need to add the concept of a group to the atom >>> model

I support Nick's option too. I think handling groups is another example of using follow on references. One question is how does an atom outside the group refer to the main atom here ? Will not garbage collection cleanup the main atom/signature atom because there are no references ? Thanks - Shankar Easwaran On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 5:00 PM, Nick Kledzik <kledzik at apple.com> wrote:

From: Matt Fleming <matt.fleming at intel.com> GCC 4.7 now places pointers to functions with the 'constructor' and 'destructor' function attributes in .init_array and .fini_array sections, respectively, whereas previously they were in the .ctors and .dtors sections. This change breaks the ctors/dtors code as it only expects function to be in the .ctors and .dtors sections,

Hello, I am attempting to merge 8 different data sets into a "grand merge" data set; all their variable names are common except for the the gas measured. However, when I did a quick stat summary comparison of merged data with unmerged data, it turned out that R mysteriously duplicated thousands of values in the merged set and I have no idea why. I've not had this problem with merge

Hi all, I am working with a spatial data set for which I am only interested in high concentration values ("leaks"). The low values (< 90th percentile) have already been turned into NA's, leaving me with a matrix like this: < CH4_leak lon lat CH4 1 -71.11954 42.35068 2.595834 2 -71.11954 42.35068 2.595688 3 NA NA NA 4 NA

On Mon, Nov 16, 2020 at 10:42 PM Igor Kudrin <ikudrin at accesssoftek.com> wrote: > > On 14.11.2020 3:42, Fāng-ruì Sòng wrote: > > For .debug_* in object files: > > > > DWARF32 -> SHT_PROGBITS (unchanged) > > DWARF64 -> SHT_DWARF64 or SHT_GNU_DWARF64 > > > > In LLD, we will need to allow mixed SHT_PROGBITS and SHT_DWARF64. If > > all

On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 10:57 PM, Shankar Easwaran <shankare at codeaurora.org> wrote: > The dynamic loader handles only one entry for DT_INIT. If there is more than > one init option, we could convert this as an .init_array instead ? > > If that doesnot work, we can come up with a .init_array option but I am not > sure about how will you handle priority with init_array's ?

On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 8:39 PM, Shankar Easwaran <shankare at codeaurora.org> wrote: > On 12/8/2014 11:09 AM, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote: >> >> On Mon, Dec 08, 2014 at 10:21:49AM -0600, Shankar Easwaran wrote: >>> >>> The DT_INIT/DT_FINI correspond to one initializer function,where as >>> DT_INIT_ARRAY/DT_FINI_ARRAY is used when there is more than one

On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 11:29 AM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 11:24 AM Fāng-ruì Sòng <maskray at google.com> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 11:17 AM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 11:05 AM Fāng-ruì Sòng <maskray at google.com> wrote: >

In https://groups.google.com/g/generic-abi/c/i2Xio-47QdQ (you need to join the group before making a post) Cary Coutant raised yet another idea: whether we can use ".debug64" as the section prefix. I like the idea because of: * It is immediately obvious whether DWARF64 is used and whether DWARF32 is used along with DWARF64. * In a relocatable link mixing DWARF32 and DWARF64 sections,

https://llvm.org/docs/tutorial/LangImpl04.html has an example where the function `foo` gets redefined, and the JIT returns evaluation of the latest definition. I thought my code was wrong, but it seems that the binary produced by `ninja Kaleidoscope-Ch4` has the same bug. Granted, my LLVM checkout is from Nov 3 2018 (r346062). Is this a known issue? ~Nick Desaulniers

Hi LLVM devs,  I came across an LLD bug in v 10.x where ELF parser / processor is setting .PROGBITS attribute for .heap and .stack sections, which leads to large binaries when we do `llvm-objcopy -o binary` to generate the binary output for armv6m. (e.g. for a 57Kb elf would yield a ~400Mb binary). This in comparison with LLVM 7.x , would produce the correct binary size of 35Kb and the

Hi, I want 12 ticks at axis 1 and want to write Jan-Dec on each. something like: axis(1, at=1:12, labels=c('J','F','M','A','M','J','J','A','S','O','N','D')) I could omit default ticks but now how to control ticks. plot(file$time, file$ch4*1000, ylim=c(1500,1700), xaxt='n', xlab= NA,

Hi guys, I am trying to use the indvars pass, but i don't see any changes in the IL representation. For this simple function void init_array(int k) { int A[20]; for (int i=2; i<10; i++) A[i] = 0; } i run *clang test-simple.c -S -emit-llvm -o test.il* and i obtain the following il representation define void @init_array(i32 %k) nounwind { entry: %k.addr = alloca i32,

Hi, On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 1:03 AM, Michael Spencer <bigcheesegs at gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 10:54 AM, Simon Atanasyan <simon at atanasyan.com> wrote: >> As far as I understand now it is impossible to generate ELF object >> file with relocation sections using yaml2obj tool. I plan to support >> ELF relocations in the yaml2obj. Does anybody work

Hi Nick, I was not aware of it, but it makes sense given the recent switch to ORC2, which has different symbol resolution rules. I am out on vacation this week, but will take a look when I get back and see if I can restore the old behavior. Cheers, Lang. Sent from my iPhone > On Jan 20, 2019, at 2:14 PM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > > +Lang who does JIT

Hi Andrew, Thanks for the background and context. "In your issue, just to clarify, is the ELF output from LLD also "large", or is it just the output from the llvm-objcopy operating on that ELF that is "large"? Do you have a simple sample to demonstrate this issue?" The ELF size is actually smaller, compared to what was generated from LLVM 7.x. (~900Kb vs