This is the mail archive of the gcc@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: Question about Tree_function_versioning

From: Oleg Endo <oleg dot endo at t-online dot de>
To: "Iyer, Balaji V" <balaji dot v dot iyer at intel dot com>
Cc: Martin Jambor <mjambor at suse dot cz>, "'gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org'" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>, "ubizjak at gmail dot com" <ubizjak at gmail dot com>, "rth at redhat dot com" <rth at redhat dot com>
Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2012 00:56:17 +0200
Subject: RE: Question about Tree_function_versioning
References: <BF230D13CA30DD48930C31D40993300005C5D2@FMSMSX102.amr.corp.intel.com> <20120326125226.GA14395@virgil.arch.suse.de> <BF230D13CA30DD48930C31D40993300005C84F@FMSMSX102.amr.corp.intel.com>

On Mon, 2012-03-26 at 22:51 +0000, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
> I have another question along the same lines. Is it possible to tell
> gcc to never delete a certain function even if it is never called in
> the executable?
> 

"__attribute__ ((used))" maybe?

Cheers,
Oleg

References:
- Question about Tree_function_versioning
  - From: Iyer, Balaji V
- Re: Question about Tree_function_versioning
  - From: Martin Jambor
- RE: Question about Tree_function_versioning
  - From: Iyer, Balaji V

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