Hello,
On Wed, Dec 11 2024, Martin Jambor wrote:
> Hello,
>
> even though it is not my work, I would like to ping this patch. Having
> it upstream would really help us a lot.
>
Please, pretty please, consider reviewing this in time for GCC 15,
having it upstream would really help us a lot and fr
Hello,
On Wed, 13 Nov 2024, Michael Matz wrote:
> Hello,
>
> this is essentially
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-May/651025.html
>
> from Kewen in functionality. When discussing this with Segher at the
> Cauldron he expressed reservations about changing the default
> i
Hello,
even though it is not my work, I would like to ping this patch. Having
it upstream would really help us a lot.
Thank you very much in advance,
Martin
On Wed, Nov 13 2024, Michael Matz wrote:
> Hello,
>
> this is essentially
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-May/6510
On Nov 13 2024, Michael Matz wrote:
> @@ -31658,6 +31660,17 @@ requires @code{.plt} and @code{.got}
> sections that are both writable and executable.
> This is a PowerPC 32-bit SYSV ABI option.
>
> +@opindex msplit-patch-nops
> +@item -msplit-patch-nops
> +When adding NOPs for a patchable area
Hello,
this is essentially
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-May/651025.html
from Kewen in functionality. When discussing this with Segher at the
Cauldron he expressed reservations about changing the default
implementation of -fpatchable-function-entry. So, to move forward, l
