From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ian Campbell Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] symbols: prefix static symbols with their source file names Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2015 14:54:00 +0000 Message-ID: <1446476040.3088.62.camel@citrix.com> References: <562E12E802000078000AE785@prv-mh.provo.novell.com> <562E217102000078000AE89F@prv-mh.provo.novell.com> <1446472027.3088.41.camel@citrix.com> <5637796602000078000B0C2F@prv-mh.provo.novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail6.bemta3.messagelabs.com ([195.245.230.39]) by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1ZtGUs-0003Zx-BX for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Mon, 02 Nov 2015 14:54:10 +0000 In-Reply-To: <5637796602000078000B0C2F@prv-mh.provo.novell.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Jan Beulich Cc: Keir Fraser , Stefano Stabellini , Andrew Cooper , Tim Deegan , xen-devel , Ian Jackson List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Mon, 2015-11-02 at 06:55 -0700, Jan Beulich wrote: > > > > On 02.11.15 at 14:47, wrote: > > On Mon, 2015-10-26 at 05:49 -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: > > > This requires adjustments to the tool generating the symbol table and > > > its as well as nm's invocation. > > > > > > Note: Not warning about duplicate symbols in the EFI case for now, as > > > a binutils bug causes misnamed file name entries to appear in EFI > > > binaries' symbol tables when the file name is longer than 18 chars. > > > (Not doing so also avoids other duplicates getting printed twice.) > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich > > > --- > > > v2: Also special case file names with directory part (along with > > > object ones). Mirror xen-syms linking changes to ARM, but for now > > > without generating warnings. > > > > Thanks for taking care of ARM. I assume "without generating warnings" > > differs from the x86 behaviour? Is there some followup which us ARM > > folks > > ought to be looking into making? > > Not right now I would say. As mentioned elsewhere, without > xSplice as a goal I don't see much use in the having those warnings. OK, thanks.