Re: PATCH: 2 stage BFD linker for LTO plugin

["H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>]

On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 4:08 PM, Ian Lance Taylor <iant@google.com> wrote:
> "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 3:54 PM, Ian Lance Taylor <iant@google.com> wrote:
>>> Alan Modra <amodra@gmail.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, Dec 06, 2010 at 09:57:14AM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>>>> Personally, I think 2 stage linking is one way to fix this issue.
>>>>
>>>> Ian has stated that he thinks this is a really bad idea. ?I haven't
>>>> approved the patch because I value Ian's opinion, and can see why he
>>>> thinks it is the wrong way to go. ?On the other hand, BFD is full of
>>>> bad ideas.. ?I'm not strongly opposed to your patch myself.
>>>
>>> Why don't we spend a short amount of time fixing these relatively minor
>>> issues in lto-plugin without going all the way to two-stage linking?
>>
>> The issues may be "relatively minor". ?But proper fix without
>> two-stage linking may be quite tricky.
>
> I see no particular reason why that should be the case. ?The issues are
> conceptually simple.

I'd like to a gold implementation which works on all known cases.

-- 
H.J.