public inbox for binutils@sourceware.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Cary Coutant <ccoutant@google.com>
To: Alexander Ivchenko <aivchenk@gmail.com>
Cc: binutils <binutils@sourceware.org>
Subject: Re: Question about ld_plugin_output_file_type and "-fpic" option
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2014 17:29:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAHACq4pUhmG42G6x5kopWMBfjnDLuJ899M6uedOHfbtf89LWZA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CACysShhtHBVrnj+-7==fC_WDY4V9mBBjwvifY9t5DsB45DZxYg@mail.gmail.com>

> "-fpic" option is turned on by default for Android compiler (both gcc
> and llvm), so if we run the compiler on a .c file and get an
> executable - it will be compiled and linked as position independent
> code (e.g. no COPY relocs).
>
> However, if we add an lto mechanism into account, the thing will be
> different. As far as I understand, for gcc case "-fpic" option will be
> given through temporary file, but llvm will rely on
> ld_plugin_output_file_type of the linker, which in the case described
> above would be just LDPO_EXEC which is not position independent. And
> so for "-fpic" and lto we will get copy relocations and stuff.

GCC records most of the options (excluding some like front-end and
driver-specific options) in the IR file so that it can use the same
options when it does the link-time translation (LTRANS). It sounds
like LLVM isn't doing that (or at least isn't recording the -fpic
option). If true, that sounds to me like a bug in LLVM.

> Since we allow to compile and link an executable with "-fpic" (I know
> that it is recommended to make an executable "-fpie" but I'm
> describing how the default compiling is done) what are the assumptions
> on a resulting executable? Should there be another entry in
> ld_plugin_output_file_type for that? "-fpic" is not given to a linker
> in any way, can we say that the resulting executable will be a
> position independent?

No, the compiler shouldn't depend on the output file type to determine
what compile-time options are needed -- there are too many options and
this would result in a combinatorial explosion.

The LDPO_PIE option is there because -pie is a linker option, and the
compiler has no other way of knowing that it's generating code for a
PIE (the design originally assumed that the -fpie compiler option
would be passed to all translation units, but was added later to allow
the optimizer more flexibility).

-cary

  parent reply	other threads:[~2014-03-20 17:29 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-03-04 14:16 Alexander Ivchenko
2014-03-20 14:03 ` Alexander Ivchenko
2014-03-20 17:29 ` Cary Coutant [this message]
2014-03-20 19:22   ` Alexander Ivchenko

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=CAHACq4pUhmG42G6x5kopWMBfjnDLuJ899M6uedOHfbtf89LWZA@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=ccoutant@google.com \
    --cc=aivchenk@gmail.com \
    --cc=binutils@sourceware.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).