From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20497 invoked by alias); 1 Apr 2010 15:42:23 -0000 Received: (qmail 20323 invoked by alias); 1 Apr 2010 15:42:03 -0000 Date: Thu, 01 Apr 2010 15:42:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20100401154203.20322.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug middle-end/43602] ___emutls_v.__gcov_indirect_call_[counters|callee] undefined on *-*-darwin* In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "bonzini at gnu dot org" Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2010-04/txt/msg00097.txt.bz2 ------- Comment #17 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2010-04-01 15:42 ------- Subject: Re: ___emutls_v.__gcov_indirect_call_[counters|callee] undefined on *-*-darwin* On 04/01/2010 01:27 PM, howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu wrote: > ------- Comment #14 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2010-04-01 11:27 ------- > Reverting back to... > > TREE_PUBLIC (ic_void_ptr_var) = 0; > > in the proposed patch results in the missing symbols again. > Can we just leave... > > TREE_PUBLIC (ic_void_ptr_var) = 1; No, I don't see how this can be correct. The symbols must _not_ be coalesced, that's why TREE_PUBLIC is zero. Paolo -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43602