From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-patches-return-380620-listarch-gcc-patches=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 19979 invoked by alias); 15 Oct 2014 17:02:29 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-patches.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 19964 invoked by uid 89); 15 Oct 2014 17:02:28 -0000
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found: No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.2
X-HELO: mail-qg0-f43.google.com
Received: from mail-qg0-f43.google.com (HELO mail-qg0-f43.google.com) (209.85.192.43) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Wed, 15 Oct 2014 17:02:27 +0000
Received: by mail-qg0-f43.google.com with SMTP id j107so1236209qga.30        for <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>; Wed, 15 Oct 2014 10:02:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;        d=1e100.net; s=20130820;        h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date         :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type;        bh=DZLGo/rBU7Q4ciQHHUNbHkxUdoQun9gVVd1S6HqfNv4=;        b=imJ8bwmpLzzB0XVELKe+ZvI9B0bC4tl9Utb8FlmZyJUUC2auTTd+SMrCLhULNMlk8y         DSL497sL1wh8B4UsyPs1NO3nn+Se//tW9l5Tiic89HPXsCsRLVR3G8MKJVH5YhXRI/HO         8v1tUE89O0PABgMRaDTeMf+ax/7tWSPdQVjnU1NKkh6f36Z7LD+j4JvzBKUi4330+Kjg         lFuQf0AEkuKGKTARD4+GTd5kvjg1G6XuEynSmxY1196b+BfXddlLpntoAhSSLvDIbNE0         tVnTn/u39cdpaNPv4I0fMnVl8hCVg5rpsgrgo40c3OIzjL26u+0zjG23EiDiVCQ4ueTz         n45Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmXCJC370WK/nibwY4+x46mEEO4RMz5IGELvlIhONe9NwwjhT0LsaDy5+wAlCOiXptyQEtw
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.224.50.196 with SMTP id a4mr13251650qag.88.1413392545494; Wed, 15 Oct 2014 10:02:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.140.81.51 with HTTP; Wed, 15 Oct 2014 10:02:25 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20141014094009.GX10376@tucnak.redhat.com>
References: <20141002151457.GA59899@msticlxl57.ims.intel.com>	<20141008102650.GV1986@tucnak.redhat.com>	<20141009120738.GA7420@msticlxl57.ims.intel.com>	<20141009200703.GA56445@GumBook.local>	<20141010065320.GA10376@tucnak.redhat.com>	<CAHACq4qgCNNxe+PPh3t8YVbdbbS5aUzeK=tH+Kp1r8Zxa1qG9Q@mail.gmail.com>	<20141010170043.GQ10376@tucnak.redhat.com>	<20141013224247.GA61615@msticlxl57.ims.intel.com>	<20141014094009.GX10376@tucnak.redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 17:03:00 -0000
Message-ID: <CAHACq4p8Kyptu6ZkRK0fJofHExJhOgKbVBNLo3h8x+bbZuNrWA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/n] OpenMP 4.0 offloading infrastructure: lto-wrapper
From: Cary Coutant <ccoutant@google.com>
To: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
Cc: Ilya Verbin <iverbin@gmail.com>, Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>, Jan Hubicka <hubicka@ucw.cz>, 	gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>, Thomas Schwinge <thomas@codesourcery.com>, 	Kirill Yukhin <kirill.yukhin@gmail.com>, Andrey Turetskiy <andrey.turetskiy@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-IsSubscribed: yes
X-SW-Source: 2014-10/txt/msg01395.txt.bz2

> My preference would be to add the | SECTION_EXCLUDE unconditionally, and
> instead guard the
>   if (flags & SECTION_EXCLUDE)
>     *f++ = 'e';
> in varasm.c (default_elf_asm_named_section).  The only other user of
> SECTION_EXCLUDE seems to be -gsplit-dwarf right now, Cary, is such a change
> ok with you?

Yes, that sounds fine.

> If you have new gas and old linker, I'd expect it would just ignore
> SHF_EXCLUDE.

Agreed.

-cary