MaskRay added a comment. In D72222#1856587 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D72222#1856587>, @hans wrote:
> In D72222#1849326 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D72222#1849326>, @hans wrote: > > > > I created D73680 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D73680> to place the patch > > > label after BTI. > > > > > > @hans Is there still time to cherry pick the patch to release/10.x? See > > > above, Linux developers really want the Clang release to have compatible > > > behavior with GCC. > > > > Yes, there is still time. Just let me know which commits to cherry-pick. > > > Just to follow up: D73680 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D73680> was cherry-picked > to 10.x. Does that mean all issues are resolved here, and the kernel folks > are happy, or is there more work expected that might affect the release? @hans Thanks for following up! All known AArch64 -fpatchable-function-entry= issues are resolved after D73680 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D73680>. D73760 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D73760> is an x86 counterpart of D73680 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D73680>. It changed the placement of the label `.Lpatch0`, which has been agreed to be superior. hjl is working on the GCC side issue https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93492. I don't know whether that fix will be included in GCC 10. From the discussions, what we did in D73760 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D73760> is a consensus and GCC will eventually do it as well. D73760 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D73760> will be nice to be cherry picked if there is not much trouble, so we won't have a major release with unsatisfactory label placement if Linux x86 developers ever want to adopt -fpatchable-function-entry=. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D72222/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D72222 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
