On 03/08/2018 10:15 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
> On 03/02/2018 05:38 PM, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
>> Hi!
>>
>> On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 16:24:48 +0100, Martin Liška <mli...@suse.cz> wrote:
>>> This fixes detection of ifunc target capability.
>>> I'm going to install the patch.
>>
>> You could also just have approved the patch I had sent two months before:
>> <http://mid.mail-archive.com/87fu9aiemr.fsf@euler.schwinge.homeip.net>.
>> ;-)
>
> Hello.
>
> Sorry for overlooking your patch. It's better to not return 0. Thomas
> please install the patch, it's obvious fix.
Looks Thomas is out of office, thus I installed his patch as r258362.
Martin
>
> Thanks,
> Martin
>
>>
>> One remark:
>>
>>> --- a/gcc/testsuite/lib/target-supports.exp
>>> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/lib/target-supports.exp
>>> @@ -449,7 +449,7 @@ proc check_ifunc_available { } {
>>> extern "C" {
>>> #endif
>>> typedef void F (void);
>>> - F* g (void) {}
>>> + F* g (void) { return 0; }
>>> void f () __attribute__ ((ifunc ("g")));
>>> #ifdef __cplusplus
>>> }
>>
>> Is it OK to "return 0" from this ifunc handler, or might some analysis in
>> GCC trip over that (at some later point)? In my patch, I returned the
>> address of an "extern" function.
>>
>>
>> Grüße
>> Thomas
>>
>
