* [Bug target/77882] [Aarch64] Add 'naked' function attribute
[not found] <bug-77882-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
@ 2022-05-25 6:39 ` i at maskray dot me
2022-05-25 6:45 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: i at maskray dot me @ 2022-05-25 6:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77882
Fangrui Song <i at maskray dot me> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |i at maskray dot me
--- Comment #11 from Fangrui Song <i at maskray dot me> ---
The number of targets supporting this attribute is large but the popular
aarch64 somehow doesn't support it... I just run into a case where supporting
this would be nice (https://reviews.llvm.org/D126343#3536318).
% grep 'naked.*function attribute,' gcc/doc/extend.texi
@cindex @code{naked} function attribute, ARC
@cindex @code{naked} function attribute, ARM
@cindex @code{naked} function attribute, AVR
@cindex @code{naked} function attribute, C-SKY
@cindex @code{naked} function attribute, MCORE
@cindex @code{naked} function attribute, MSP430
@cindex @code{naked} function attribute, NDS32
@cindex @code{naked} function attribute, RISC-V
@cindex @code{naked} function attribute, RL78
@cindex @code{naked} function attribute, RX
@cindex @code{naked} function attribute, x86
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread* [Bug target/77882] [Aarch64] Add 'naked' function attribute
[not found] <bug-77882-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
2022-05-25 6:39 ` [Bug target/77882] [Aarch64] Add 'naked' function attribute i at maskray dot me
@ 2022-05-25 6:45 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-17 15:28 ` stefan.tauner at gmx dot at
` (2 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-05-25 6:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77882
--- Comment #12 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Fangrui Song from comment #11)
> The number of targets supporting this attribute is large but the popular
> aarch64 somehow doesn't support it... I just run into a case where
> supporting this would be nice (https://reviews.llvm.org/D126343#3536318).
That is not really a good use case really. a testcase is general purpose use
case.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread* [Bug target/77882] [Aarch64] Add 'naked' function attribute
[not found] <bug-77882-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
2022-05-25 6:39 ` [Bug target/77882] [Aarch64] Add 'naked' function attribute i at maskray dot me
2022-05-25 6:45 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-01-17 15:28 ` stefan.tauner at gmx dot at
2024-04-08 18:39 ` ndesaulniers at google dot com
2024-04-08 19:25 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
4 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: stefan.tauner at gmx dot at @ 2023-01-17 15:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77882
stefan.tauner at gmx dot at changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |stefan.tauner at gmx dot at
--- Comment #13 from stefan.tauner at gmx dot at ---
Please reconsider this. I ran into this when debugging pointer authentication
not working correctly where I have to replace the prologue of a specific
existing non-trivial C function. This would be way easier with this attribute
and some inline assembly than replacing the whole function.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread* [Bug target/77882] [Aarch64] Add 'naked' function attribute
[not found] <bug-77882-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2023-01-17 15:28 ` stefan.tauner at gmx dot at
@ 2024-04-08 18:39 ` ndesaulniers at google dot com
2024-04-08 19:25 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
4 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: ndesaulniers at google dot com @ 2024-04-08 18:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77882
Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers at google dot com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |ndesaulniers at google dot com
--- Comment #14 from Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers at google dot com> ---
Adding a data point from
https://discourse.llvm.org/t/hand-written-in-assembly-in-libc-setjmp-longjmp/73249/9.
It's becoming a code portability issue when clang supports this function
attribute on functions for aarch64 targets but GCC does not.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread* [Bug target/77882] [Aarch64] Add 'naked' function attribute
[not found] <bug-77882-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2024-04-08 18:39 ` ndesaulniers at google dot com
@ 2024-04-08 19:25 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
4 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2024-04-08 19:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77882
--- Comment #15 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Nick Desaulniers from comment #14)
> Adding a data point from
> https://discourse.llvm.org/t/hand-written-in-assembly-in-libc-setjmp-longjmp/
> 73249/9.
>
> It's becoming a code portability issue when clang supports this function
> attribute on functions for aarch64 targets but GCC does not.
Not really since you still can use a .s (or .S) file there .... That is how all
other libc implement their setjmp/longjump and even correctly. Some will even
use a generator to get the offsets and/or use static_asserts to make sure
offsets stay correct.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread