Hi!
On Fri, Mar 02, 2018 at 10:54:36AM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 02, 2018 at 09:31:16AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Fri, 2 Mar 2018, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, Mar 02, 2018 at 09:15:07AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> > > > You probably need a virtual return th
On Fri, 2 Mar 2018, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Fri, Mar 02, 2018 at 10:54:36AM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 02, 2018 at 09:31:16AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2 Mar 2018, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Fri, Mar 02, 2018 at 09:15:07AM +0100, Richard Bie
On Fri, Mar 02, 2018 at 09:31:16AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Mar 2018, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Mar 02, 2018 at 09:15:07AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> > > You probably need a virtual return thunk as otherwise we expand them
> > > directly to asm?
> >
> > I was trying x
On Fri, Mar 02, 2018 at 08:58:34AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Mar 2018, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> > Hi!
> >
> > If we need to use thunks for ICF to functions with warning or error
> > attribute, their expansion will warn or error. This patch just punts
> > in those cases instead.
>
On Fri, 2 Mar 2018, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 02, 2018 at 09:15:07AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> > You probably need a virtual return thunk as otherwise we expand them
> > directly to asm?
>
> I was trying x86_64 -m32 -fpic regparm (3) method with thunks so that
> the asm isn't emitte
On Fri, Mar 02, 2018 at 09:15:07AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> You probably need a virtual return thunk as otherwise we expand them
> directly to asm?
I was trying x86_64 -m32 -fpic regparm (3) method with thunks so that
the asm isn't emitted. But the thunk was still using call to .LTHUNKN
rat
On Fri, 2 Mar 2018, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 02, 2018 at 08:58:34AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Fri, 2 Mar 2018, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >
> > > Hi!
> > >
> > > If we need to use thunks for ICF to functions with warning or error
> > > attribute, their expansion will warn or erro
On Fri, 2 Mar 2018, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> If we need to use thunks for ICF to functions with warning or error
> attribute, their expansion will warn or error. This patch just punts
> in those cases instead.
>
> Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux, ok for trunk?
Looks
Hi!
If we need to use thunks for ICF to functions with warning or error
attribute, their expansion will warn or error. This patch just punts
in those cases instead.
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux, ok for trunk?
2018-03-02 Jakub Jelinek
PR ipa/84628
* i