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: IFUNC attribute

From: "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>
To: Nathan Sidwell <nathan at codesourcery dot com>
Cc: GCC Patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2010 09:16:32 -0700
Subject: Re: IFUNC attribute
References: <4C3DDDDC.9050900@codesourcery.com> <AANLkTilxKfcX0-AqaFWDWLb7kSnlW3MgRsjPVhZVxeXu@mail.gmail.com> <4C3DE10C.3050804@codesourcery.com>

On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 9:08 AM, Nathan Sidwell <nathan@codesourcery.com> wrote:
> On 07/14/10 16:57, H.J. Lu wrote:
>
>> I don't see much value in this than the current scheme. I don't
>> think it should go in.
>
> GCC doesn't have a current scheme for handling ifunc functions, I believe
> you have to hack it up with asm inserts -- the same could be done to provide
> the functionality of the alias attribute, and yet it is in GCC.
>

As I said before, the current asm statement scheme works to
certain degree. As far as user is concerned, your scheme is
very similar and has the same drawbacks.

-- 
H.J.

Follow-Ups:
- Re: IFUNC attribute
  - From: Michael Matz

References:
- IFUNC attribute
  - From: Nathan Sidwell
- Re: IFUNC attribute
  - From: H.J. Lu
- Re: IFUNC attribute
  - From: Nathan Sidwell

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