> > In theory we could change the build system to avoid that case though, but > > it would need some changes. > > > > It would be better if that could be handled somehow. > > How does this work with your patchset? Ideally we should have way to claim > only portions of object files, but we don't have that. If we claim the file, > the symbols in real symbol table are not visible.
It works with HJ's Linux binutils. It handles LTO and non LTO separately. > I suppose we could play a games here with slim LTO: claim the file, see if > there are any symbols defined in the non-LTO symbol table and if so, interpret > read the symbol table and tell linker about the symbols and at the very end > include the offending object file in the list of objects returned back to > linker. > > The linker then should take the symbols it wants. There would be some fun > involved, because the resolution info we get will consider the symbols > defined in that object file to be IR which would need to be compensated for. Yes something like that would be needed. -Andi -- a...@linux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only
