--- Additional Comments From hjl at lucon dot org 2007-08-16 13:29 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> Subject: Re: Linker should check code sequence before TLS
> optimization
>
> On Thu, Aug 16, 2007 at 01:08:34PM -, hjl at lucon dot org wrote:
> > 1. Those sequences may not be op
--- Additional Comments From drow at false dot org 2007-08-16 13:19 ---
Subject: Re: Linker should check code sequence before TLS
optimization
On Thu, Aug 16, 2007 at 01:08:34PM -, hjl at lucon dot org wrote:
> 1. Those sequences may not be optimal in all cases. If compiler
--- Additional Comments From hjl at lucon dot org 2007-08-16 13:08 ---
1. Those sequences may not be optimal in all cases. If compiler knows
those optimizations won't be performed, it can generate better sequence.
But sometimes compiler may be wrong and we wind up with code sequences
whic
--- Additional Comments From hjl at lucon dot org 2007-08-16 13:00 ---
I may want to verify if the content of .eh_frame_hdr is correct by
dumping and checking it. It is hard to interpret the output of
"readelf -S".
--
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Additional Comments From jakub at redhat dot com 2007-08-16 08:47
---
Which compilers violate the TLS ABI? tls.pdf clearly says that the sequences
are not optional, if you use the corresponding relocations, you must use them
only in the listed sequences.
--
What|Rem
--- Additional Comments From jakub at redhat dot com 2007-08-16 08:46
---
Why should it? It contains only precomputed redundant info which you can find
out from readelf -S (i.e. where .eh_frame section is located) and readelf -wf.
--
What|Removed |Ad
It turns out that the binutils mailing list is the contact address
for this package, as well. So here's another well-travelled email.
Begin forwarded message:
Hello again :)
As I have requested before, please encourage GNU developers to fill
in the Report-Msgid-Bugs-To header [1], so we tr
