================
@@ -599,11 +599,18 @@ void baremetal::Linker::ConstructJob(Compilation &C,
const JobAction &JA,
const Driver &D = getToolChain().getDriver();
const llvm::Triple::ArchType Arch = TC.getArch();
const llvm::Triple &Triple = getToolChain().getEffectiveTriple();
+ const bool IsStaticPIE = getStaticPIE(Args, TC);
if (!D.SysRoot.empty())
CmdArgs.push_back(Args.MakeArgString("--sysroot=" + D.SysRoot));
CmdArgs.push_back("-Bstatic");
+ if (IsStaticPIE) {
+ CmdArgs.push_back("-pie");
+ CmdArgs.push_back("--no-dynamic-linker");
----------------
quic-garvgupt wrote:
> think @petrhosek was asking specifically about the "--no-dynamic-linker" flag.
Thanks for clarifying this.
>I think for gnu ld it is necessary as it's possible to mix -static and -shared
>according to the manpage. I presume this ensures that you get an error in that
>case rather than a statically linked shared library.
Yes, if it’s the default behavior for LLD, then it would still be necessary for
GNU LD. When both `-static` and `-shared` are used i.e., when creating a
statically linked shared library, all definitions within the library are fully
resolved at link time and pulled from static libraries. In such cases, there is
no need for a dynamic linker.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/147589
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
