Stelian Pop wrote:
> However, I didn't find a way to say to gcc that it cannot use the "direct"
> jump in some cases, and force it to use the "indirect_jump" instead.
>
>> I don't think it'll work to have a jump insn that is sometimes direct,
>> sometimes indirect.
>
>> Looking at how the rs6000 backend handles direct and indirect calls and
>> jumps might give you some inspiration too.
>
> Well, I already did look at all the backends, but didn't find the answer
> (although the answer probably is hidden somewhere inside those files...).
>
> As for the rs6000 backend I see a simple direct call pattern, not sure what
> you want me to look at:
It's been a few years since I used to work with that backend so it might
have changed beyond all recognition, but IIRC the longcall mechanism manages
to choose between short immediate-offset PC-relative branches and long
indirect-through-register jumps at compile-time, and it might be possible to
draw some inspiration from how it does that.
cheers,
DaveK
