On 10/26/20 2:43 PM, Jozef Lawrynowicz wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 26, 2020 at 07:08:06PM +, Pedro Alves via Gcc-patches wrote:
>> On 10/6/20 12:10 PM, Jozef Lawrynowicz wrote:
>>
>>> Should "used" apply SHF_GNU_RETAIN?
>>> ===
>>> Another talking point is whether the
On Mon, Oct 26, 2020 at 07:08:06PM +, Pedro Alves via Gcc-patches wrote:
> On 10/6/20 12:10 PM, Jozef Lawrynowicz wrote:
>
> > Should "used" apply SHF_GNU_RETAIN?
> > ===
> > Another talking point is whether the existing "used" attribute should
> > apply the SHF
On Mon, Oct 26, 2020 at 07:08:06PM +, Pedro Alves via Gcc-patches wrote:
> On 10/6/20 12:10 PM, Jozef Lawrynowicz wrote:
>
> > Should "used" apply SHF_GNU_RETAIN?
> > ===
> > Another talking point is whether the existing "used" attribute should
> > apply the SHF
On 10/6/20 12:10 PM, Jozef Lawrynowicz wrote:
> The changes would also only affect targets
> that support the GNU ELF OSABI, which would lead to inconsistent
> behavior between non-GNU OS's.
Well, a separate __attribute__((retain)) will necessarily only work
on GNU ELF targets, so that just shifts
On 10/6/20 12:10 PM, Jozef Lawrynowicz wrote:
> Should "used" apply SHF_GNU_RETAIN?
> ===
> Another talking point is whether the existing "used" attribute should
> apply the SHF_GNU_RETAIN flag to the containing section.
>
> It seems unlikely that a user applies th
Hi,
I'd like to propose a new "retain" attribute, which can
be applied to function and variable declarations.
The attribute is used to protect the function or variable declaration it
is applied to from linker garbage collection, by applying the
SHF_GNU_RETAIN section flag to the section containin
