Does gold support deadcode elimination on relocatable files
Ian Lance Taylor
iant@google.com
Mon Dec 22 18:28:00 GMT 2008
More information about the Binutils mailing list
Mon Dec 22 18:28:00 GMT 2008
- Previous message (by thread): Does gold support deadcode elimination on relocatable files
- Next message (by thread): [PATCH, AVR] Add support for new AVR devices
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Neo Jia <neojia@gmail.com> writes: > On Dec 21, 2008, at 11:51 AM, Ian Lance Taylor <iant@google.com> wrote: > >> "Neo Jia" <neojia@gmail.com> writes: >> >>>> After the garbage collection patch for executables is committed, it >>>> would be perfectly reasonable to extend it by providing a mechanism >>>> for specifying an explicit root set. At that time it would be >>>> reasonable to enable garbage collection for relocatable links when a >>>> root set is specified. This work would not require any significant >>>> changes to the existing garbage collection work. >>> >>> As most relocatable files are used in SDK, can we just use the SDK >>> header files to build the root set? >> >> In general, yes, probably. But, of course, my quoted paragraph >> remains true. I'll also note that gold will never have the ability to >> read header files. >> > > So, would it be possible to make gold to take a user defined root set? Yes, certainly. Patches welcome. Ian
- Previous message (by thread): Does gold support deadcode elimination on relocatable files
- Next message (by thread): [PATCH, AVR] Add support for new AVR devices
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Binutils mailing list