================
@@ -1015,8 +1063,20 @@ void LoongArch::finalizeRelax(int passes) const {
r.expr = r.sym->hasFlag(NEEDS_PLT) ? R_PLT_PC : R_PC;
break;
case R_LARCH_B26:
+ case R_LARCH_TLS_LE_LO12_R:
+ skip = 4;
+ write32le(p, aux.writes[writesIdx++]);
+ break;
+ case R_LARCH_TLS_GD_PCREL20_S2:
+ // Note: R_LARCH_TLS_LD_PCREL20_S2 must also use R_TLSGD_PC instead
+ // of R_TLSLD_PC because the processing of relocation
+ // R_LARCH_TLS_LD_PC_HI20 is the same as R_LARCH_TLS_GD_PC_HI20. If
----------------
ylzsx wrote:
Thanks for your review. I will revise it to the following description. Do you
think it is clear?
```
Note: R_LARCH_TLS_LD_PCREL20_S2 must also use R_TLSGD_PC instead
of R_TLSLD_PC due to historical reasons. In fact, TLSLD is not fully supported
on LoongArch. We need to handle relocation of R_LARCH_TLS_LD_PC_HI20
as equivalent to R_LARCH_TLS_GD_PC_HI20.
This reason has also been mentioned in mold commit:
https://github.com/rui314/mold/commit/5dfa1cf07c03bd57cb3d493b652ef22441bcd71c
```
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/123600
_______________________________________________
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
