It looks fine to me. Anton, does it look ok to you? Evan On Mar 20, 2009, at 2:33 PM, Corrado Zoccolo wrote:> I've created a patch (attached to the bug): > http://llvm.org/bugs/attachment.cgi?id=2744, that goes in a different > direction, and solves the safety problems. > The patch uses original asm, but removes the call through plt, and > puts the invoked function in an anonymous namespace. This allows the > static linker to always know the location of the jump, removing the > need for PIC invocation setup. > This is tested with g++ 4.2 . > > Corrado > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
Hi Evan> It looks fine to me. Anton, does it look ok to you?This looks ok for me modulo win64+vcpp issues, which I mentioned in the PR (external .asm files). The anonymous namespace thing should be guarded by define (either _M_AMD64 or X86_64_JIT && _MSC_VER, I'd prefer the latter). -- With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov. Faculty of Mathematics & Mechanics, Saint Petersburg State University.
Unfortunately I don't have a windows machine to test the changes. Who can apply the patch + the suggested ifdef and test it? Corrado On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 7:42 PM, Anton Korobeynikov <asl at math.spbu.ru> wrote:> Hi Evan > >> It looks fine to me. Anton, does it look ok to you? > This looks ok for me modulo win64+vcpp issues, which I mentioned in the > PR (external .asm files). The anonymous namespace thing should be > guarded by define (either _M_AMD64 or X86_64_JIT && _MSC_VER, I'd prefer > the latter). > > -- > With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov. > > Faculty of Mathematics & Mechanics, Saint Petersburg State University. >-- __________________________________________________________________________ dott. Corrado Zoccolo mailto:czoccolo at gmail.com PhD - Department of Computer Science - University of Pisa, Italy --------------------------------------------------------------------------