Bug ID 1073187
Summary Another section specification was not stored in the generated object file.
Classification openSUSE
Product openSUSE Tumbleweed
Version Current
Hardware x86-64
OS SUSE Other
Status NEW
Severity Normal
Priority P5 - None
Component Development
Assignee bnc-team-screening@forge.provo.novell.com
Reporter Markus.Elfring@web.de
QA Contact qa-bugs@suse.de
Found By ---
Blocker ---

Created attachment 753374 [details]
Update example: Addition of section identifiers for two function definitions

I tried out to specify extra sections for two functions as the attached patch
example shows. I tried to clarify my understanding of desired software
behaviour also by a request on the topic ���Difficulties with section
specifications for function definitions?���.
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-help/2017-12/msg00034.html

I hope to get a bit more constructive feedback according to the software ���GCC
7.2.1+r253932-2.3��� for a test result like the following.


elfring@Sonne:~/Projekte/Linux/next-patched> my_cc=/usr/bin/gcc-7 &&
my_module=drivers/target/loopback/tcm_loop.o && make -j4 CC="${my_cc}"
HOSTCC="${my_cc}" EXTRA_CFLAGS='-Og' allmodconfig "${my_module}" && size -A
"${my_module}" | grep my_
���
my_update           510      0
my_test1            360      0


If I pass an other setting for the code optimisation like ���Os��� or ���O3���, I
observe that the section name ���my_test1��� is not displayed so far.
I would like to compare sizes for code sections (I am interested in) between
software build variants. My approach seems to trigger further development
considerations then when my extra names will be omitted somehow in special
build configurations.

How can the situation be improved?


You are receiving this mail because: