Re: PATCH: Fix linker plugin support for gnu linker

[Ian Lance Taylor <iant at google dot com>]

"H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com> writes:

>>> Avoiding Â2 stage linking makes the whole LTO infrastructure
>>> unnecessarily more complex.
>>
>> But, I want to say this carefully and I hope that you will read it
>> carefully, that work has already been done and was part of the linker
>> plugin design from the very beginning. ÂYes, it is more complex. ÂBut
>> the work has already been done and it is already working. ÂExcept for
>> this rather unusual case, and I have already shown how a simple and
>> small extension to the plugin design accounts for this case as well.
>
> By the same token, I have implemented 2 stage linking in GNU linker
> and it works with the current linker plugin ABI.

But that is really not the same token.  I am saying: the plugin was
designed to avoid 2 stage linking.  You are saying: I can do 2 stage
linking with the plugin.  That is true, but you can also do 2 stage
linking with a much simpler plugin.

> If you think this is a "rather unusual case" and the current
> design/implementation works for majority cases, I don't see
> big problems for GNU linker to do 2 stage linking and gold keeps
> the current behavior.

I don't want gold to keep the current behaviour, because that is clearly
buggy (for an unusual case).  I am suggesting that gold adopt the patch
I sent out (http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2010-12/msg00347.html) which
solves all cases that I know about.

Ian