https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98971
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98971
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||11.0
Known to fail|11.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98971
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Liska :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0d701e3eb89870237669ef7bf41394d90c35ae70
commit r11-7133-g0d701e3eb89870237669ef7bf41394d90c35ae70
Author: Martin Liska
Date: Fri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98971
--- Comment #5 from Gabriel F. T. Gomes ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #4)
>
> Well, the intermediate object contains just LTO bytecode, that's why you
> can't see the section. You can use -ffat-lto-objects in order to generate
> both
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98971
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
> The only difference now is that the intermediate object doesn't have a
> __patchable_function_entries section, but that's OK as far as I can tell.
Well, the intermediate object contains just LTO bytecode, t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98971
--- Comment #3 from Gabriel F. T. Gomes ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #2)
>
> @Gabriel: Is it intended behavior?
That's what I expected, yes! Thank you.
The only difference now is that the intermediate object doesn't have a
__patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98971
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
Created attachment 50133
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50133&action=edit
Tentative patch
As seen the flag -fpatchable-function-entry is properly marked as Optimization.
However, it's th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98971
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Assignee|unassigned at gcc do
