similar to: lld :: ELF/invalid/symtab-sh-info.s is flaky on Windows

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 1000 matches similar to: "lld :: ELF/invalid/symtab-sh-info.s is flaky on Windows"

2020 Nov 11
0
lld :: ELF/invalid/symtab-sh-info.s is flaky on Windows
According to https://reviews.llvm.org/D88348#2344466, that diff should fix the failure. From: llvm-dev <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org> on behalf of Fāng-ruì Sòng via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> Reply-To: Fāng-ruì Sòng <maskray at google.com> Date: Tuesday, November 10, 2020 at 10:13 PM To: LLVM Developers Mailing List <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> Cc: Nico
2020 Nov 09
2
Targeting old glibc
No. A shared object is needed if it is linked in (1)--no-as-needed mode or (2) after --gc-sections, a symbol referenced by a live input section is defined by the shared object. You'll need to check whether a symbol is defined by libmvec.so.1 On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 9:57 AM Alexandre Bique <bique.alexandre at gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 6:52 PM Fāng-ruì Sòng
2019 Dec 05
2
GC for defsym'd symbols in LLD
I have made some further investigation. My conclusion is that GNU ld does not do better than lld. Making the --defsym behavior ideal is difficult in the current framework. GNU ld has some unintended behaviors. ld.bfd a.o --defsym 'd=foo' --gc-sections -o a => GNU ld retains .text_foo ld.bfd a.o --defsym 'd=foo+3' --gc-sections -o a => GNU ld drops .text_foo ld.bfd a.o
2018 Jul 30
3
r338291 - Remove trailing space
I apologize that my two patches "Remove trailing space" (r338291 in clang, r338293 in llvm) are committed without a discussion happening within the community. Forward to llvm-dev and cfe-dev to see if they are what the community would like to see committed or not. The original discussion is at this thread http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-commits/Week-of-Mon-20180730/236802.html On
2020 Mar 04
4
Allowing PRs on GitHub for some subprojects
On Wed, Mar 4, 2020 at 8:14 AM Louis Dionne <ldionne at apple.com> wrote: > Mehdi, Chris & others, > > I guess I did not express the main reasons for wanting to switch over very > well in my original message. > You original message was about “ commit attribution”, but now it is all about testing? Instead of jumping to a solution (pull-request) why not expressing the
2020 Mar 05
2
Allowing PRs on GitHub for some subprojects
On 2020-03-04, Louis Dionne via llvm-dev wrote: > > >> On Mar 4, 2020, at 12:13, Mehdi AMINI <joker.eph at gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Wed, Mar 4, 2020 at 8:14 AM Louis Dionne <ldionne at apple.com <mailto:ldionne at apple.com>> wrote: >> Mehdi, Chris & others, >> >> I guess I did not express the main reasons for
2020 Jul 28
3
Please unbreak phabricator
Sorry, I didn't notice this change of default last night. Thanks for fixing this! -- Mehdi On Tue, Jul 28, 2020 at 5:50 AM MyDeveloper Day via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > I've made the change > > https://reviews.llvm.org/harbormaster/plan/5/ > > MyDeveloperDay <https://reviews.llvm.org/p/MyDeveloperDay/> changed the Hold > Drafts
2017 Dec 14
2
Help adding entries to .symtab
Hi everyone, I am fairly new to LLVM, I'm working on a new backend. I am trying to add information to a specific instruction using the .symtab in the ELF format. I've been searching through the LLVM source code trying to find a way to do such a thing. Can anyone help me with some directions or point me to some documents in the matter. Thanks, Liad. -------------- next part --------------
2020 Nov 10
2
Targeting old glibc
Thank you very much for your help Fāng-ruì Sòng. I've tried various things like linking directly to libm-2.32 but it didn't work, it seems that libm-2.32 still pulls libmvec. I have the following linker flags: CLANG_LDFLAGS="-fuse-ld=lld -static-libstdc++ -static-libgcc -fvisibility=hidden -fdata-sections -ffunction-sections" CLANG_LDFLAGS="$CLANG_LDFLAGS
2020 Jul 28
2
Please unbreak phabricator
This is configured in the "pre-merge checks" build plan, the "Hold Drafts" needs to be set to "Never" I should be able to change this in the build plan if you want but I don't want to step on anyone's toes MyDeveloperDay On Tue, Jul 28, 2020 at 1:35 PM MyDeveloper Day <mydeveloperday at gmail.com> wrote: > See the "Draft Mode" changes,
2020 Mar 05
2
Allowing PRs on GitHub for some subprojects
On Wed, Mar 4, 2020 at 9:42 AM Louis Dionne <ldionne at apple.com> wrote: > > > On Mar 4, 2020, at 12:13, Mehdi AMINI <joker.eph at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Mar 4, 2020 at 8:14 AM Louis Dionne <ldionne at apple.com> wrote: > >> Mehdi, Chris & others, >> >> I guess I did not express the main reasons for wanting to switch over
2019 Nov 15
4
MLIR landing in the monorepo
On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 10:58 AM Fāng-ruì Sòng <maskray at google.com> wrote: > Since you are going to rewrite the mlir history anyway, you can > probably delete accidentally checked in large files if any. > Good point, I checked and this is the largest file in the history of the repo as far as I can tell:
2017 Dec 14
0
Help adding entries to .symtab
Hi Liad, I'm not an expert in MC, but what you describe doesn't sound any different from how you would handle a branch instruction. Create an MCSymbol that represents the address of the target instruction; use that symbol as an operand in the referencing instruction; emit the symbol as a label just prior to emitting the target instruction. The second and third steps can occur in either
2020 Nov 17
5
[LLD] Support DWARF64, debug_info "sorting"
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
2005 Jun 04
1
[LLVMdev] "Value in symtab but has no slot number!!"
Hi Reid, Thanks for your help! I could detect the problem and the module now can be saved (it was a problem with some Alloca instructions). I could not find a "verify" method in the Module class, but just for the records, I did this: --------------- PassManager Passes; // Add an appropriate TargetData instance for this module... Passes.add(new TargetData("save",
2005 Jun 04
3
[LLVMdev] "Value in symtab but has no slot number!!"
Hello, I am receiving this error: assert(Slot != -1 && "Value in symtab but has no slot number!!"); While trying to generate a module at run time using LLVM classes. Specifically with an instance of StoreInst class. After I generate all the instructions, I try to save the Module to bytecode, but I receive that error in the method 'outputSymbolTable' Does anyone
2005 Jun 04
0
[LLVMdev] "Value in symtab but has no slot number!!"
Hi Ricardo, Yes, its because you have an invalid module. You should run Module::verify before attempting to write the bytecode. This will pinpoint the problem for you. However, I think I know what's going on: you've left an object (a Value not a Type) in the symbol table that is not in the Module. Not quite sure how you do that, but I suppose its possible if you manipulated the symbol
2017 Dec 14
2
Help adding entries to .symtab
Hey Paul, first of all thank you for taking the time to answer me, if I understand you correctly, I need to modify the instruction it self so one of it's operands is a symbol, and then at MC layer handle that symbol and add an entry to the symtab for that label? What kind of symbol should I use doing such thing? external symbol or MCSymbol? I was trying to find where in the code during the MC
2007 Aug 02
4
[PATCH][ELF] Correct space calculation for symtab when BSD_SYMTAB=yes
Hi! If there is a string table for section headers, it also gets loaded. Therefore take it into account in size calculation for kernel symtab. Also there is no need to call elf_set_verbose() a second time after elf_init() (First call happens within elf_init()). Signed-off-by: Christoph Egger <Christoph.Egger@amd.com> Keir: Can you also apply changeset 15672 and this patch to Xen
2020 Mar 01
6
Allowing PRs on GitHub for some subprojects
On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 4:19 AM Christian Kühnel via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Hi Louis, > > I think this is a good idea. We should start with some local experiments > where people are willing to try it and figure out how well that works and > what does not. Why not allow this for "not significant" changes? They are > merged without review