[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID:
<MWHPR1201MB0110E08D50EBE88731F6641ACBB99@MWHPR1201MB0110.namprd12.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2021 12:53:49 -0800
From: Fangrui Song <i@...kray.me>
To: Jiahao XU <Jiahao_XU@...look.com>
Cc: "musl@...ts.openwall.com" <musl@...ts.openwall.com>, Szabolcs Nagy <nsz@...t70.net>
Subject: Re: Can’t build musl with lto=thin
On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 12:04 PM Szabolcs Nagy <nsz@...t70.net> wrote:
>
> * Jiahao XU <Jiahao_XU@...look.com> [2021-01-29 12:19:42 +0000]:
> > musl-1.2.2 compilation with clang-11 failed to build libc.so at the final linking stage:
> > ld.lld: error: undefined hidden symbol: __dls2
> > >>> referenced by ld-temp.o
> > >>> lto.tmp:(_dlstart_c)
> > >>> did you mean: __dls3
> > >>> defined in: lto.tmp
>
>
> looks like a clang bug if -flto changes behaviour, doesn't it?
https://www.openwall.com/lists/musl/2020/12/27/25
Clang tracks undefined symbols in module-level inline asm but does not
know undefined symbols in function-scope inline asm.
I don't know whether it makes sense to track function-scope inline asm
- it requires to scan every instruction in the bitcode file which is a
heavy operation and it is only relevant in this narrow usage.
If you build this file with LTO, the LTO backend will internalize
__dls2 and cause a subsequent "undefined reference" error unless you
specify -u __dls2
to mark __dls2 as "visibible to a regular object file" (a workaround)
>
> >
> > I am using CFLAGS=‘-march=native -mtune=native -Oz -flto -fmerge-all-constants -fomit-frame-pointer’ and LDFLAGS=‘-flto -fuse-ld=lld -Wl,—plugin-opt=O3,-O3,—icf=safe’.
> > No configure option is supplied.
> >
> > Get Outlook for iOS<https://aka.ms/o0ukef>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
