https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80732
--- Comment #5 from Martin Liška <marxin at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Yichao Yu from comment #4) > `double (*pf1)(double, double, double) = dlsym(hdl, "f1.ifunc");` > > Wouldn't it be better if GCC generates local functions `f1.default`, > `f1.fma` as implementation and `f1` to replace `f1.ifunc`? It's quite > incontinent if this detail is exposed. > > If one have to use `f1.ifunc`, does it also mean that the declaration of the > function in the header must also have `target_clone` applied? Yep, agree with you that's inconvenient. I've got semi-working patch, where I need to vanish assembler names in a better way. Will send patch in next days.
