Re: [patch][mudflap] Mudflap cleanup

[Ian Lance Taylor <iant at google dot com>]

Richard Guenther <richard.guenther@gmail.com> writes:

> On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 11:33 PM, Olatunji Ruwase<tjruwase@google.com> wrote:
>>> Hm, what's this?
>>>
>>> + Â/* Enable pragma redefines. */
>>> + Âtargetm.handle_pragma_redefine_extname = true;
>>> +
>>>
>>
>> mudflap requires that pragma redefines be enabled. Asides enabling
>> it for all targets in target-def.h, I could not think of a way to do this
>> only for mudflap. I would appreciate any suggestions.
>
> IMHO either mf-runtime.h should not use #pragma redefine_extname
> (it could use asm("newname") with the same effect, available
> unconditionally), or we should unconditionally enable this pragma.

I think we should unconditionally enable pragma redefine_extname.  I
can't think of any reason why it should be target specific.  Richard
Henderson added it back here
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2002-03/msg01261.html as target
specific, but I think it's fine to always support it.

I'm not sure asm will work, since you would have to worry about a
possible leading underscore.  Though perhaps it would work to use asm
(__USER_LABEL__PREFIX__ "newname").

Ian