https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17931
--- Comment #3 from Alan Modra <amodra at gmail dot com> --- I hear what you're saying, and accept that gc-sections could be made to work for the specific case you present here. However, I'm unconvinced that we should do this in the linker, to work around what appears to be a gcc bug. We've kept groups together under gc-sections right from the initial implementation of section group support in 2001. The major reason for doing this is to keep on-the-side sections, eg. debug info, when any of their grouped code or data sections are kept. These on-the-side sections don't have relocations from other sections that would cause them to be kept by the usual gc-sections marking process. For an example of sections that appear in a loaded image, exception handling info, .eh_frame and associated sections, is another set of on-the-side sections that a compiler could place in a group (and should instead of relying on ld's eh_frame editing!). Are there similar on-the-side code sections that would prevent us making an exception for code sections in a group? I don't know of any, but people do weird things.. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
