On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 9:21 AM, Jan Hubicka <hubi...@ucw.cz> wrote:
>> >>>>> > class ipa_opt_pass_d;
>> >>>>> > typedef ipa_opt_pass_d *ipa_opt_pass;
>> >>>>> > @@ -2894,7 +2896,8 @@ cgraph_node::only_called_directly_or_aliased_p
>> >>>>> > (void)
>> >>>>> > && !DECL_STATIC_CONSTRUCTOR (decl)
>> >>>>> > && !DECL_STATIC_DESTRUCTOR (decl)
>> >>>>> > && !used_from_object_file_p ()
>> >>>>> > - && !externally_visible);
>> >>>>> > + && !externally_visible
>> >>>>> > + && !lookup_attribute ("ifunc", DECL_ATTRIBUTES (decl)));
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> How's it handled for our own generated resolver functions? That is,
>> >>>>> isn't there sth cheaper than doing a lookup_attribute here? I see
>> >>>>> that make_dispatcher_decl nor ix86_get_function_versions_dispatcher
>> >>>>> adds the 'ifunc' attribute (though they are TREE_PUBLIC there).
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Is there any drawback of setting force_output flag?
>> >>>> Honza
>> >>>
>> >>> Setting force_output may prevent some optimizations. Can we add a bit
>> >>> for IFUNC resolver?
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >> Here is the patch to add ifunc_resolver to cgraph_node. Tested on x86-64
>> >> and i686. Any comments?
>> >>
>> >
>> > PING:
>> >
>> > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-04/msg00647.html
>> >
>>
>> PING.
> OK, but please extend the verifier that ifunc_resolver flag is equivalent to
> lookup_attribute ("ifunc", DECL_ATTRIBUTES (decl))
> so we are sure things stays in sync.
>
Like this
diff --git a/gcc/symtab.c b/gcc/symtab.c
index 80f6f910c3b..954920b6dff 100644
--- a/gcc/symtab.c
+++ b/gcc/symtab.c
@@ -998,6 +998,13 @@ symtab_node::verify_base (void)
error ("function symbol is not function");
error_found = true;
}
+ else if ((lookup_attribute ("ifunc", DECL_ATTRIBUTES (decl))
+ != NULL)
+ != dyn_cast <cgraph_node *> (this)->ifunc_resolver)
+ {
+ error ("inconsistent `ifunc' attribute");
+ error_found = true;
+ }
}
else if (is_a <varpool_node *> (this))
{
Thanks.
--
H.J.
