Follow-up to https://reviews.llvm.org/D112643. Even after that change, we were
still asserting if two separate functions that are eligible for ICF (same size,
same data, same number of relocs, same reloc types, ...) referred to
Undefineds. This fixes that oversight.
Details
Details
- Reviewers
int3 - Group Reviewers
Restricted Project - Commits
- rGbc20bcb39e02: [lld/mac] Crash even less on undefined symbols with --icf=all
Diff Detail
Diff Detail
- Repository
- rG LLVM Github Monorepo
Event Timeline
lld/MachO/ICF.cpp | ||
---|---|---|
117–118 | hmm having an Undefined here basically means that the link will error out, right? maybe add a comment to that effect (tbh I'm not sure the assert is worth much any more, basically the only thing we are still excluding is LazySymbols...) |
lld/MachO/ICF.cpp | ||
---|---|---|
117–118 | Correct, it'll error out later. Added a comment here and in the other place. Thanks! |
hmm having an Undefined here basically means that the link will error out, right? maybe add a comment to that effect
(tbh I'm not sure the assert is worth much any more, basically the only thing we are still excluding is LazySymbols...)