gcc/ChangeLog:

        * config/aarch64/aarch64.cc
        (aarch64_expand_epilogue): Use TARGET_PAUTH.
        * config/aarch64/aarch64.md: Update comment.


diff --git a/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.cc b/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.cc
index 
e7bb3278a27eca44c46afd26069d608218198a54..cf1107127fd5d9e12ad42441528666bf6b733f73
 100644
--- a/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.cc
+++ b/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.cc
@@ -10042,12 +10042,12 @@ aarch64_expand_epilogue (rtx_call_insn *sibcall)
        1) Sibcalls don't return in a normal way, so if we're about to call one
           we must authenticate.
 
-       2) The RETAA instruction is not available before ARMv8.3-A, so if we are
-          generating code for !TARGET_ARMV8_3 we can't use it and must
+       2) The RETAA instruction is not available without FEAT_PAuth, so if we
+          are generating code for !TARGET_PAUTH we can't use it and must
           explicitly authenticate.
     */
   if (aarch64_return_address_signing_enabled ()
-      && (sibcall || !TARGET_ARMV8_3))
+      && (sibcall || !TARGET_PAUTH))
     {
       switch (aarch64_ra_sign_key)
        {
diff --git a/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.md b/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.md
index 
c54b29cd64b9e0dc6c6d12735049386ccedc5408..0940a84f9295ee2bc07282b150095fdb5af11a4d
 100644
--- a/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.md
+++ b/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.md
@@ -7672,10 +7672,10 @@
 )
 
 ;; Pointer authentication patterns are always provided.  In architecture
-;; revisions prior to ARMv8.3-A these HINT instructions operate as NOPs.
+;; revisions prior to FEAT_PAuth these HINT instructions operate as NOPs.
 ;; This lets the user write portable software which authenticates pointers
-;; when run on something which implements ARMv8.3-A, and which runs
-;; correctly, but does not authenticate pointers, where ARMv8.3-A is not
+;; when run on something which implements FEAT_PAuth, and which runs
+;; correctly, but does not authenticate pointers, where FEAT_PAuth is not
 ;; implemented.
 
 ;; Signing/Authenticating R30 using SP as the salt.

Reply via email to