This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: [AArch64] Don't generate GOT entry for large model TLS LE relocation
- From: Jiong Wang <jiong dot wang at foss dot arm dot com>
- To: Marcus Shawcroft <marcus dot shawcroft at gmail dot com>
- Cc: "binutils at sourceware dot org" <binutils at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2015 10:53:02 +0000
- Subject: Re: [AArch64] Don't generate GOT entry for large model TLS LE relocation
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <567AD20C dot 4040007 at foss dot arm dot com> <CAFqB+PwFOFLw0ANtcPyygR_=VJCnzmaztaFXsCCKryg0-2JYRg at mail dot gmail dot com>
On 23/12/15 18:10, Marcus Shawcroft wrote:
On 23 December 2015 at 16:55, Jiong Wang <email@example.com> wrote:
This patch revert the following commit
Author: Renlin Li <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: Fri Oct 2 17:02:53 2015 +0100
I have not looked at this in detail, I'm out of the office at the
moment, but I did notice that this is more than a revert!
Please split this into two patches.
1) The revert request.
2) The new functionality you want to add.
I think the revert is safe because it is a relaxation, leaving the
original sequence in place should be fine, also it only affects large
model and the default model is small. I think the patch being reverted
here may have had test cases submitted later as a separate patch?
Yes. the patch being reverted was trying the fix bug exposed by testcase
which is submitted in the next commit. So my concern was a pure revert
patch will actually cause regression on above testcase. Thus I
correct fix from my understanding to make sure no regression will happen.
The revert part of this is IMO going to be suitable for 2.26, however
I don;t think we should be taking the new functionality part on 2.26,
at least not until it has baked on the trunk for a while.