This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
Home Products Support Community News


Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] x86-64: suppress some unneeded side effects of -

To: "Keir Fraser" <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] x86-64: suppress some unneeded side effects of -fPIC
From: "Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2006 15:07:14 +0100
Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Wed, 13 Sep 2006 07:06:23 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <C12DC306.12EA%Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <C12DC261.12E8%Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <C12DC306.12EA%Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx> 13.09.06 15:15 >>>
>On 13/9/06 14:12, "Keir Fraser" <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> Hmm, bad luck, this time I had hoped it'll take you a little longer to 
>>> commit
>>> it, as we've found a better solution: Using #pragma GCC visibility, *all*
>>> data references benefit, not just the ones to objects defined in the same
>>> translation unit. However, as this now is a header file change, detection
>>> logic cannot be used as nicely, so I guess we want to keep the previous
>>> change and add this one on top.
>>> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> It does stack okay on top of command-line option? I'm assuming so, and I'll
>> check in this new patch in addition to the one I already committed.

Yes, it should.

>Actually, another question first: if gcc does not understand the pragma will
>it silently ignore it? Then we could get rid of check for GNUC>3, and we
>could get rid of -fvisibility=hidden too.

You'd get a warning, which is being turned into an error by the build scripts.


Xen-devel mailing list