This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: undefined reference to __gxx_personality_v0
On Sunday, June 17, 2012 08:28:31 Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 2012-06-15 15:50, Roland McGrath wrote:
> > OK, so those are in fact indirect references from the .eh_frame
> > section. Why it's DW.ref... is some arcana that I don't entirely
> > understand and am not bothering to investigate thoroughly. Some
> > GCC hacker who groks what dw2_force_const_mem is for can explain
> > that for us. (I'm curious.)
> When a variable is eliminated from the optimized code, and its value
> was a constant, we can spill the constant value to memory and adjust
> the dwarf code to keep the variable and properly describe its value.
>
> There is the presumption that the constant is really referenced in the
> code, so we are not adding a new reference to a symbol. I'm a bit
> surprised that this is the only reference...
Richard,
are you suggesting that GCC 4.7 (the compiler I use) is doing a better
job at optimization than GCC 4.4 (Roland's and Chris' version)?
Btw. the test case was introduced in May 2011 and I never saw it
failing,
Andreas
--
Andreas Jaeger aj@{suse.com,opensuse.org} Twitter/Identica: jaegerandi
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
GF: Jeff Hawn,Jennifer Guild,Felix Imendörffer,HRB16746 (AG Nürnberg)
GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F FED1 389A 563C C272 A126