This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: PATCH: Optimize protected call for i386
- From: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>
- To: "H. J. Lu" <hjl at lucon dot org>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 17:40:03 -0700
- Subject: Re: PATCH: Optimize protected call for i386
- References: <20030512185613.A14533@lucon.org> <20030513020400.GS2166@bubble.sa.bigpond.net.au> <20030512192302.A14731@lucon.org> <20030513135912.GA966@bubble.sa.bigpond.net.au> <20030513142716.A20059@lucon.org> <20030514085453.GA957@bubble.sa.bigpond.net.au> <20030514074940.A2376@lucon.org> <20030514230253.GD957@bubble.sa.bigpond.net.au> <20030514232439.GC9567@redhat.com> <20030514235107.GG957@bubble.sa.bigpond.net.au>
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 09:21:07AM +0930, Alan Modra wrote:
> How is the linker supposed to distinguish
> this reloc from an R_386_PC32 on ".long foo - ."?
Who cares? You can't generate this from C. As for assembly,
"don't do that if you care about pointer equality".
Indeed, I can think of reasons to use this pcrel form if you
_don't_ want pointer equality. Such as in .eh_frame data.
r~