remove embedded LLD

we no longer have any patches against upstream LLD

1 files changed, 0 insertions, 85 deletions

diff --git a/deps/lld/docs/missingkeyfunction.rst b/deps/lld/docs/missingkeyfunction.rst
deleted file mode 100644
index db4ea11b4a..0000000000
--- a/deps/lld/docs/missingkeyfunction.rst
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,85 +0,0 @@
-Missing Key Function
-====================
-
-If your build failed with a linker error something like this::
-
-  foo.cc:28: error: undefined reference to 'vtable for C'
-  the vtable symbol may be undefined because the class is missing its key function
-  (see https://lld.llvm.org/missingkeyfunction)
-
-it's likely that your class C has a key function (defined by the ABI as the first
-non-pure, non-inline, virtual function), but you haven't actually defined it.
-
-When a class has a key function, the compiler emits the vtable (and some other
-things as well) only in the translation unit that defines that key function. Thus,
-if you're missing the key function, you'll also be missing the vtable. If no other
-function calls your missing function, you won't see any undefined reference errors
-for it, but you will see undefined references to the vtable symbol.
-
-When a class has no non-pure, non-inline, virtual functions, there is no key
-function, and the compiler is forced to emit the vtable in every translation unit
-that references the class. In this case, it is emitted in a COMDAT section,
-which allows the linker to eliminate all duplicate copies. This is still
-wasteful in terms of object file size and link time, so it's always advisable to
-ensure there is at least one eligible function that can serve as the key function.
-
-Here are the most common mistakes that lead to this error:
-
-Failing to define a virtual destructor
---------------------------------------
-
-Say you have a base class declared in a header file::
-
-  class B {
-  public:
-    B();
-    virtual ~B();
-    ...
-  };
-
-Here, ``~B`` is the first non-pure, non-inline, virtual function, so it is the key
-function. If you forget to define ``B::~B`` in your source file, the compiler will
-not emit the vtable for ``B``, and you'll get an undefined reference to "vtable
-for B".
-
-This is just an example of the more general mistake of forgetting to define the
-key function, but it's quite common because virtual destructors are likely to be
-the first eligible key function and it's easy to forget to implement them. It's
-also more likely that you won't have any direct references to the destructor, so
-you won't see any undefined reference errors that point directly to the problem.
-
-The solution in this case is to implement the missing function.
-
-Forgetting to declare a virtual function in an abstract class as pure
----------------------------------------------------------------------
-
-Say you have an abstract base class declared in a header file::
-
-  class A {
-  public:
-    A();
-    virtual ~A() {}
-    virtual int foo() = 0;
-    ...
-    virtual int bar();
-    ...
-  };
-
-This base class is intended to be abstract, but you forgot to mark one of the
-functions pure. Here, ``A::bar``, being non-pure, is nominated as the key function,
-and as a result, the vtable for ``A`` is not emitted, because the compiler is
-waiting for a translation unit that defines ``A::bar``.
-
-The solution in this case is to add the missing ``= 0`` to the declaration of
-``A::bar``.
-
-Key function is defined, but the linker doesn't see it
-------------------------------------------------------
-
-It's also possible that you have defined the key function somewhere, but the
-object file containing the definition of that function isn't being linked into
-your application.
-
-The solution in this case is to check your dependencies to make sure that
-the object file or the library file containing the key function is given to
-the linker.