https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43038
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43038
--- Comment #12 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-02
10:16:12 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #11)
The original LTO proposal included assembler changes to allow multiple
local symbols with the same name in the output.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43038
--- Comment #13 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at ucw dot cz 2011-03-02 16:32:20
UTC ---
Not mangling statics unless conflict is found is indeed desirable QOI thing.
It makes assembly and other things look
a lot more smoother than it does now.
Honza
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43038
--- Comment #14 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at ucw dot cz 2011-03-02 16:34:22
UTC ---
Ah, the reason for writting reply was primarily the observation that enforcing
partitioning based on origin of asm statement won't fly with crossmoudle
inlining,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43038
--- Comment #15 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-02
16:39:09 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #14)
Ah, the reason for writting reply was primarily the observation that enforcing
partitioning based on origin of asm statement
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43038
--- Comment #16 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-02
16:42:02 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #15)
(In reply to comment #14)
Ah, the reason for writting reply was primarily the observation that
enforcing
partitioning
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43038
--- Comment #17 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at ucw dot cz 2011-03-02 16:56:47
UTC ---
Well, with a used global local decl I would just leave the unit alone,
doing a 1:1 partition for it (not mangling it). That way we can even
handle multiple
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43038
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43038
--- Comment #8 from Dmitry Gorbachev d.g.gorbachev at gmail dot com
2011-03-01 12:46:39 UTC ---
The problem is that statics need to be mangled, so they persist
as i.1234 instead. Really refering to a local symbol in asm is
going to be
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43038
--- Comment #9 from joseph at codesourcery dot com joseph at codesourcery dot
com 2011-03-01 16:39:23 UTC ---
On Tue, 1 Mar 2011, d.g.gorbachev at gmail dot com wrote:
The problem is that statics need to be mangled, so they persist
as i.1234
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43038
--- Comment #10 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-01
16:42:26 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
On Tue, 1 Mar 2011, d.g.gorbachev at gmail dot com wrote:
The problem is that statics need to be mangled, so they persist
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43038
--- Comment #11 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at ucw dot cz 2011-03-01 17:41:48
UTC ---
The original LTO proposal included assembler changes to allow multiple
local symbols with the same name in the output. You could resurrect that,
though
12 matches
Mail list logo
