+ flagword flags;
+ const char *name;
+ struct bfd_section_already_linked *l;
+ struct bfd_section_already_linked_hash_entry *already_linked_list;
+
+ flags = sec->flags;
+ if ((flags & SEC_LINK_ONCE) == 0)
+ return;
+
+ /* FIXME: When doing a relocatable link, we may have trouble
+ copying relocations in other sections that refer to local symbols
+ in the section being discarded. Those relocations will have to
+ be converted somehow; as of this writing I'm not sure that any of
+ the backends handle that correctly.
+
+ It is tempting to instead not discard link once sections when
+ doing a relocatable link (technically, they should be discarded
+ whenever we are building constructors). However, that fails,
+ because the linker winds up combining all the link once sections
+ into a single large link once section, which defeats the purpose
+ of having link once sections in the first place. */
+
+ name = bfd_get_section_name (abfd, sec);
+
+ already_linked_list = bfd_section_already_linked_table_lookup (name);
+
+ for (l = already_linked_list->entry; l != NULL; l = l->next)
+ {
+ bfd_boolean skip = FALSE;
+ struct coff_comdat_info *s_comdat
+ = bfd_coff_get_comdat_section (abfd, sec);
+ struct coff_comdat_info *l_comdat
+ = bfd_coff_get_comdat_section (l->sec->owner, l->sec);
+
+ /* We may have 3 different sections on the list: group section,
+ comdat section and linkonce section. SEC may be a linkonce or
+ comdat section. We always ignore group section. For non-COFF
+ inputs, we also ignore comdat section.
+
+ FIXME: Is that safe to match a linkonce section with a comdat
+ section for COFF inputs? */
+ if ((l->sec->flags & SEC_GROUP) != 0)
+ skip = TRUE;
+ else if (bfd_get_flavour (abfd) == bfd_target_coff_flavour)
+ {
+ if (s_comdat != NULL
+ && l_comdat != NULL
+ && strcmp (s_comdat->name, l_comdat->name) != 0)
+ skip = TRUE;
+ }
+ else if (l_comdat != NULL)
+ skip = TRUE;
+
+ if (!skip)
+ {
+ /* The section has already been linked. See if we should
+ issue a warning. */
+ switch (flags & SEC_LINK_DUPLICATES)
+ {
+ default:
+ abort ();
+
+ case SEC_LINK_DUPLICATES_DISCARD:
+ break;
+
+ case SEC_LINK_DUPLICATES_ONE_ONLY:
+ (*_bfd_error_handler)
+ (_("%B: warning: ignoring duplicate section `%A'\n"),
+ abfd, sec);
+ break;
+
+ case SEC_LINK_DUPLICATES_SAME_CONTENTS:
+ /* FIXME: We should really dig out the contents of both
+ sections and memcmp them. The COFF/PE spec says that
+ the Microsoft linker does not implement this
+ correctly, so I'm not going to bother doing it
+ either. */
+ /* Fall through. */
+ case SEC_LINK_DUPLICATES_SAME_SIZE:
+ if (sec->size != l->sec->size)
+ (*_bfd_error_handler)
+ (_("%B: warning: duplicate section `%A' has different size\n"),
+ abfd, sec);
+ break;
+ }
+
+ /* Set the output_section field so that lang_add_section
+ does not create a lang_input_section structure for this
+ section. Since there might be a symbol in the section
+ being discarded, we must retain a pointer to the section
+ which we are really going to use. */
+ sec->output_section = bfd_abs_section_ptr;
+ sec->kept_section = l->sec;
+
+ return;
+ }
+ }
+
+ /* This is the first section with this name. Record it. */
+ bfd_section_already_linked_table_insert (already_linked_list, sec);