[PATCH v3 1/4] bfd,ld,dlltool: Emit delay-load import data into its own section

[Jeremy Drake]

On Fri, 6 Jun 2025, Jan Beulich wrote:

> On 06.05.2025 08:50, Jeremy Drake wrote:
> > From: LIU Hao <lh_mouse@126.com>
> >
> I was meaning to commit this today, but obviously(?) ran it through the testsuite
> first. This introduces regressions for 3 testcases for both Cygwin and MinGW. Did
> you not observe these, or did you simply not run the testsuite for either of
> these (pretty common when it comes to PE/COFF) targets?
>
> The failures also appear to point out a problem with the code changes themselves,
> i.e. it's not just the testcase expectations that need adjustment. For
> ld-pe/secrel_64.d and ld-pe/secidx_64.d I don't see why suddenly a .didat section
> would be present in the output. Neither test looks to be using delayload
> functionality. For ld-pe/tlssec64.d the issue is likely the same, even if it
> expresses itself differently in the expected vs actual output delta.

Was this with just this patch, or the whole series?  The extraneous .didat
section was one of the reasons I worked on followup patches to this first
patch by LIU Hao.

> Overall this also reminds me of another shortcoming of the series: There's no
> new testcase being added, making sure the new functionality won#t regress.

AFAIK, there are no tests for delayload functionality.  Anything beyond
simple tweaking of existing tests is pretty well outside my expertise, and
I'd need a bit of hand-holding if you want me to add all-new tests for it.