search for: cb64b8d9

On Sat, 2018-02-03 at 01:08 +0000, Chandler Carruth wrote: > > Sure, I can see why for the kernel, this is important. It also gets > to essentially define its ABI however it wants. > > For our other users, they specifically don't want this in the ABI > (because they actually have DSOs and other junk being linked > together). And yes, we actually have a decent number of

On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 4:59 PM David Woodhouse <dwmw2 at infradead.org> wrote: > > > On Sat, 2018-02-03 at 00:51 +0000, Chandler Carruth wrote: > > While you *can* export your external thunk, that's a choice of the code > defining the thunk. > > > The driving force in the kernel is to be able to runtime patch the thunks > away, when running on a CPU or in a

...ut how to find a solution that also doesn't cause problems for the compiler. This is just a note for the future though, the retpoline stuff is above. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20180206/cb64b8d9/attachment.html>