> On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 08:48:19PM +0100, Jan Hubicka wrote: > > Thanks, the i386 parts of the patch are OK, but I think you want to add the > > reverse > > transformation, too. I.e. if someone compiles with -fPIC but links without. > > I've only done it this way because that is what > ix86_option_override_internal was doing, but supposedly only because the > command line option is only about the non-PIC variants. > So I agree that the other direction makes sense too and will adjust it. > > > My plan to fix the testcase was to put it into > > ix86_function_specific_restore > > which would save need for a new hook. But I am fine either way (just can't > > approve the newhook) > > The way the streaming in now works is that we don't have a gcc_options > structure anywhere, so if it was done in the *_restore hook, you'd need > to *_save it first and then restore.
I see, we call cl_target_option_restore but not the hook. Oh well, then. Cleaning this up for GCC 6 would be amazing - I am sure we can do with fewer hooks and less of target code. Honza > > Richard, are you ok with the new hook? > > Jakub
