erichkeane accepted this revision. erichkeane added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
I think the .ifunc spelling was an oversight on my part when I implemented this, I didn't spend enough time investigating GCC's behavior when implementing this feature. I think the alias is the right way about it, but I think the .ifunc should be the alias (at least as far as I can think it through right now). I think that works better because it supports a case where the 'definition' of the target-clones function is generated with GCC, but the 'caller' (also with target clones) comes from clang. I THINK that makes more sense? But perhaps try to chart out the behavior of the GCC/Clang "Knows about TC"/"Doesn't know about TC" in each situation to see which are troublesome? Additionally, this needs a release note. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D158666/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D158666 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
