jhuber6 added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang/test/Driver/linker-wrapper-libs.c:27 // // Check that we extract a static library defining an undefined symbol. // ---------------- tra wrote: > jhuber6 wrote: > > tra wrote: > > > How does this test test the functionality of the undefined symbol? E.g. > > > how does it fail now, before the patch? > > > > > > Is there an explicit check we could to do to make sure things work as > > > intended as opposed to "there's no obvious error" which may also mean "we > > > forgot to process *undefined.bc". > > Yeah, I wasn't sure how to define a good test for this. The problem I > > encountered before making this patch was that having another file that used > > an undefined symbol would override the `NewSymbol` check and then would > > prevent it from being extracted. So this checks that case. > AFAICT, with -DUNDEFINED, the file would have only `extern int sym;`. CE says > suggests that it produces an embty bitcode file: > https://godbolt.org/z/EY9a8Pfeb > > What exactly is supposed to be in the `*.undefined.bc` ? If it's intended to > have an undefined reference to `sym` you need to add some sort of a reference > to it. > Good catch, forgot about that. It's why the other use of `extern sym` returns it. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D151839/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D151839 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
