On Fri, Nov 05, 2021 at 04:37:09PM +, Iain Sandoe wrote:
> It is hard to judge the relative effort in the two immediately visible
> solutions:
>
> 1. relocatable PCH
> 2. taking the tree streamer from the modules implementation, moving its home
> to c-family and adding hooks so that each
> On 8 Nov 2021, at 07:16, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> On Fri, Nov 5, 2021 at 5:37 PM Iain Sandoe wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On 5 Nov 2021, at 15:25, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, Nov 05, 2021 at 11:31:58AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
On Fri, Nov 5, 2021 at 10:54 AM Jakub Jelinek wr
On Fri, Nov 5, 2021 at 5:37 PM Iain Sandoe wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 5 Nov 2021, at 15:25, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Nov 05, 2021 at 11:31:58AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> >> On Fri, Nov 5, 2021 at 10:54 AM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Nov 05, 2021 at 10:42:05AM +0100, Richar
> On 5 Nov 2021, at 15:25, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> On Fri, Nov 05, 2021 at 11:31:58AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 5, 2021 at 10:54 AM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, Nov 05, 2021 at 10:42:05AM +0100, Richard Biener via Gcc-patches
>>> wrote:
I had the impression w
On Fri, Nov 05, 2021 at 11:31:58AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 5, 2021 at 10:54 AM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Nov 05, 2021 at 10:42:05AM +0100, Richard Biener via Gcc-patches
> > wrote:
> > > I had the impression we have support for PCH file relocation to deal with
> > >
On Fri, Nov 5, 2021 at 10:54 AM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> On Fri, Nov 05, 2021 at 10:42:05AM +0100, Richard Biener via Gcc-patches
> wrote:
> > I had the impression we have support for PCH file relocation to deal with
> > ASLR
> > at least on some platforms.
>
> Unfortunately we do not, e.g. if y
On Fri, Nov 05, 2021 at 10:42:05AM +0100, Richard Biener via Gcc-patches wrote:
> I had the impression we have support for PCH file relocation to deal with ASLR
> at least on some platforms.
Unfortunately we do not, e.g. if you build cc1/cc1plus as PIE on
x86_64-linux, PCH will stop working unless
On Thu, Nov 4, 2021 at 9:03 PM Iain Sandoe via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> GCC (currently) has an implementation of pre-compiled-headers, that relies
> on being able to launch the compiler executable at the same address each
> time. This constraint is not permitted by some system security models.
>
>
GCC (currently) has an implementation of pre-compiled-headers, that relies
on being able to launch the compiler executable at the same address each
time. This constraint is not permitted by some system security models.
The facility is an optimisation; saving the output of parsing a covering
heade
