On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 03:14:02PM -0400, David Edelsohn wrote: > On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 11:53 AM, Richard Guenther > wrote: > > > Well, that's up to the target maintainers to decide, maybe > > -mno-nested-functions instead? > > Is -mno-nested-functions or -mno-nested-function-pointers too > C-centric or GCC-centric? I don't know what wording would be more > informative, but the functionality is available in Pascal, PL/I, Ada, > GCC extensions and other languages. We're open to suggestions. > > > The compiler certainly can't figure out in _all_ cases - but it should be able to handle > > most of the cases (with LTO even more cases) ok, no? > > -mno-r11 is an assertion to the compiler that no function calls > through pointers will require the static chain. However, I agree that > the compiler conservatively should be able to figure out some cases > itself, which would be a good enhancement. I changed the switch to -mno-pointers-to-nested-functions as David requestion in private communications. [gcc] 2011-07-13 Michael Meissner * config/rs6000/rs6000.opt (-mpointers-to-nested-functions): Rename -mr11. * config/rs6000/rs6000.c (rs6000_trampoline_init): Ditto. (rs6000_call_indirect_aix): Ditto. * config/rs6000/rs6000.md (call_indirect_aix): Ditto. (call_indirect_aix_internal): Ditto. (call_indirect_aix_nor11): Ditto. (call_indirect_aix_internal2): Ditto. (call_value_indirect_aix): Ditto. (call_value_indirect_aix_internal): Ditto. (call_value_indirect_aix_nor11): Ditto. (call_value_indirect_aix_internal2): Ditto. * doc/invoke.texi (RS/6000 and PowerPC Options): Ditto. [gcc/testsuite] 2011-07-13 Michael Meissner * gcc.target/powerpc/no-r11-1.c: Change -mno-r11 to -mno-pointers-to-nested-functions. * gcc.target/powerpc/no-r11-2.c: Ditto. * gcc.target/powerpc/no-r11-3.c: Ditto. -- Michael Meissner, IBM 5 Technology Place Drive, M/S 2757, Westford, MA 01886-3141, USA meissner@linux.vnet.ibm.com fax +1 (978) 399-6899