Re: PING^3: [PATCH] i386: Don't generate alias for function return thunk

2018-03-15 Thread H.J. Lu
On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 12:54 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote: >> On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 10:47 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote: >> >> On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 9:03 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote: >> >> >> > What is the reason for using different names for return and indirect >> >> >> > thunks at first place? >> >> >> > >>

Re: PING^3: [PATCH] i386: Don't generate alias for function return thunk

2018-03-15 Thread Jan Hubicka
> On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 10:47 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote: > >> On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 9:03 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote: > >> >> > What is the reason for using different names for return and indirect > >> >> > thunks at first place? > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> These 2 thunks are identical. But one may wan

Re: PING^3: [PATCH] i386: Don't generate alias for function return thunk

2018-03-15 Thread Jan Hubicka
> On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 10:47 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote: > >> On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 9:03 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote: > >> >> > What is the reason for using different names for return and indirect > >> >> > thunks at first place? > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> These 2 thunks are identical. But one may wan

Re: PING^3: [PATCH] i386: Don't generate alias for function return thunk

2018-03-15 Thread H.J. Lu
On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 10:47 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote: >> On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 9:03 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote: >> >> > What is the reason for using different names for return and indirect >> >> > thunks at first place? >> >> > >> >> >> >> These 2 thunks are identical. But one may want to provide a

Re: PING^3: [PATCH] i386: Don't generate alias for function return thunk

2018-03-15 Thread Jan Hubicka
> On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 9:03 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote: > >> > What is the reason for using different names for return and indirect > >> > thunks at first place? > >> > > >> > >> These 2 thunks are identical. But one may want to provide an > >> alternate thunk only for > >> indirect branch and lea

Re: PING^3: [PATCH] i386: Don't generate alias for function return thunk

2018-03-15 Thread H.J. Lu
On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 9:03 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote: >> > What is the reason for using different names for return and indirect >> > thunks at first place? >> > >> >> These 2 thunks are identical. But one may want to provide an >> alternate thunk only for >> indirect branch and leaves return thunk

Re: PING^3: [PATCH] i386: Don't generate alias for function return thunk

2018-03-15 Thread Jan Hubicka
> > What is the reason for using different names for return and indirect thunks > > at first place? > > > > These 2 thunks are identical. But one may want to provide an > alternate thunk only for > indirect branch and leaves return thunk alone. You can't do that if > both have the same > name.

Re: PING^3: [PATCH] i386: Don't generate alias for function return thunk

2018-03-15 Thread H.J. Lu
On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 8:51 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote: >> On Sun, Mar 11, 2018 at 7:39 AM, H.J. Lu wrote: >> > On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 4:17 AM, H.J. Lu wrote: >> >> On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 12:48 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: >> >>> Function return thunks shouldn't be aliased to indirect branch thunks >> >>> s

Re: PING^3: [PATCH] i386: Don't generate alias for function return thunk

2018-03-15 Thread Jan Hubicka
> On Sun, Mar 11, 2018 at 7:39 AM, H.J. Lu wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 4:17 AM, H.J. Lu wrote: > >> On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 12:48 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: > >>> Function return thunks shouldn't be aliased to indirect branch thunks > >>> since indirect branch thunks are placed in COMDAT section a