From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm1-f42.google.com (mail-wm1-f42.google.com [209.85.128.42]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 51C403857810 for ; Tue, 29 Sep 2020 14:04:37 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 51C403857810 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=palves.net Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=alves.ped@gmail.com Received: by mail-wm1-f42.google.com with SMTP id e17so4755740wme.0 for ; Tue, 29 Sep 2020 07:04:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=7/Hcm5JpHeL8dBEkLAM0UpBiUI2/sSUi8h36eV3jvZQ=; b=SrV27O6jEslyIYRvm7Iuf0/YRS/nUm/GdhBKlXhHPmjJ7omudv8OuqGr3wqrKkYUke mR1R0Wxt+qeUkyi/UdB4HKk4kaPFAd+Jv/ig3JlV/lRS9fC4p5QExOJAhX6n4qgnKFbm fytfc/nN+7pJb9rxjmmTMlwviGNNdyVHuj4hAT+iUo92M4nuwH9uTbjw/S7NqlDaTW5w nPAGQB5LGbhFrVYWD30l6/VgiS69SOPIYEFqxX2m3QqnaOl+SFOzoYpQuy2xlke27321 JoIT0yxqBnU9LW9PsJkbwzsvLyBiW3S+W3rGsSLqg6ritigO4spmBWo7btLdsJcGHPYc CLpg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533aP8CdMNwvZNcuyUyDJLVQjxTS00TdDtrMlkKD8p3RRgLa+m+H NG5Y/fXpETaz8pAATABh3gzuov7d2a4+JA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyZXqpjbzvd0Vaf3Y0jWLS2uIm1hYTDqkBJhbU6t5hvodF7Uv7UevYphxkWStXfWOYA+sq8qg== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:9a57:: with SMTP id c84mr4734640wme.136.1601388275648; Tue, 29 Sep 2020 07:04:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPv6:2001:8a0:f905:5600:eefd:c63:53e0:3e8a? ([2001:8a0:f905:5600:eefd:c63:53e0:3e8a]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id m3sm6371781wrs.83.2020.09.29.07.04.33 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 29 Sep 2020 07:04:33 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH] Support SHF_GNU_RETAIN ELF section flag To: Michael Matz References: <20200922202933.kgflmtnwzkdrmrvs@jozef-acer-manjaro> <20200928122822.nql5aatbpo7kr5si@jozef-acer-manjaro> <7982913d-90a3-c435-d152-b18f46cad62c@palves.net> <810fbf87-ed6d-9d11-62ba-c92dd75b52b8@palves.net> Cc: binutils@sourceware.org From: Pedro Alves Message-ID: Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2020 15:04:32 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.2.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN, FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, KAM_DMARC_STATUS, NICE_REPLY_A, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: binutils@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Binutils mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2020 14:04:38 -0000 On 9/29/20 2:55 PM, Michael Matz wrote: > Definitely. But used vs retain attribute seemed like a too detailed > distinction to make at this point. For the GCC patches it's totally > appropriate, though, as planned. It's only planned now because I brought it up. I think that shooting down a subthread like this implying I'm getting in the way is kind of uncalled for, to be honest. If anything, it should make people wonder whether a better name for the flag would be SHF_GNU_USED, so that we don't end up with more than one term for the same thing in the toolchain. Though yes, that's minor. Anyway, please don't let me hold anything up.