This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sourceware.org
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: [6/6][PATCH] Respect symbol wrappers when computing symbol resolutions.
- From: "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>
- To: Dave Korn <dave dot korn dot cygwin at gmail dot com>
- Cc: "binutils at sourceware dot org" <binutils at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2011 20:50:29 -0800
- Subject: Re: [6/6][PATCH] Respect symbol wrappers when computing symbol resolutions.
- References: <4D684CB8.6020106@gmail.com> <4D684D00.70803@gmail.com> <4D684D79.9090708@gmail.com>
On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 4:46 PM, Dave Korn <dave.korn.cygwin@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> ? ?Hi list,
>
> ?I found this running the GCC testsuite, where on cygwin we use ld wrappers
> to allow replacement of libstdc++ new/delete operators.
>
> ld/ChangeLog:
>
> 2011-02-24 ?Dave Korn ?<...
>
> ? ? ? ?* plugin.c (get_symbols): Use wrapped lookup for undefined symbols.
>
> ?I'd like it if someone can confirm that I've correctly interpreted the
> comment that precedes the definition of bfd_wrapped_link_hash_lookup, about
> how it should "only be used for references to an undefined symbol, not for
> definitions of a symbol"; I took that to mean that I should key off the
> initial state of defined-ness of the symbol passed from the plugin and call
> either a wrapped or unwrapped lookup accordingly, but possibly since we're
> asking about the resolution of a symbol, it would make as much sense to always
> treat this as if we were looking up an undefined reference and simply always
> call the wrapped lookup?
>
You can add a testcase to LTO tests on lto-mixed branch.
--
H.J.