joerg added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D39079#905468, @rnk wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D39079#905454, @joerg wrote: > > > It also increases the pressure on the branch predictor, so it is not really > > black and white. > > > I don't understand this objection. I'm assuming that the PLT stub is an > indirect jump through the PLTGOT, > not a hotpatched stub that jumps directly to the definition chosen by the > loader. This is the ELF model > that I'm familiar with, especially since calls to code more than 2GB away > generally need to be indirect anyway. Correct, so all local calls to the same function go via the same location and share the predication of the indirect jump. >> Qt5 tries that. Requires further hacks as the main binary must be compiled >> as fully position independent code to not run into fun latter. Fun with copy >> relocations is only part of it. > > I'm not sure I understand, but this patch isn't introducing copy relocations, > to be clear. That was in reference to using it for clang. https://reviews.llvm.org/D39079 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
