This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Fix profiling for PIC Thumb code


On Fri, 2005-03-04 at 09:53, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-03-02 at 15:50, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> > On Wed, 2005-03-02 at 15:32, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> > > Gas accepts (and does very little with, nowadays) the "(PLT)" suffix for
> > > ARM.  However, it doesn't accept it for Thumb.  All the uses of
> > > NEED_PLT_RELOC are already guarded by TARGET_ARM except for this one.
> > > 
> > > OK for HEAD and csl-arm-branch?  Not sure about 4.0 - definitely it is not a
> > > regression.
> > 
> > OK for head and csl-arm.
> > 
> > My inclination is to leave it out of 4.0.  It might still be possible to
> > use gcc-4 with an assembler/linker combination that is old enough not to
> > do the right thing if the marking is omitted.  By the time we get to 4.1
> > I think there will be sufficiently new features in the ARM port to
> > require upgrading binutils to something that can cope.
> > 
> > R.
> 
> Following a request from Eric Christopher, I've re-reviewed this patch,
> and on reflection I can't see any reason why it would cause problems on
> 4.0, so could you install it there too?
> 
> R.
> 
> [for some reason I was thinking you were trying to remove (PLT) markings
> unconditionally, not just in thumb mode]

Incidentally, there's a (suspended) PR for this: 3925.

Do you know if there are any other outstanding PLT issues, or can we
close the PR now?

R.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]