================ @@ -5964,6 +5964,11 @@ def mxcoff_roptr : Flag<["-"], "mxcoff-roptr">, Group<m_Group>, Flags<[TargetSpecific]>, Visibility<[ClangOption, CC1Option]>, HelpText<"Place constant objects with relocatable address values in the RO data section and add -bforceimprw to the linker flags (AIX only)">; def mno_xcoff_roptr : Flag<["-"], "mno-xcoff-roptr">, Group<m_Group>, TargetSpecific; +def mno_inline_glue : Flag<["-"], "mno-inline-glue">, Group<m_Group>, + HelpText<"Use ._ptrgl routine for indirect calls (AIX only)">; +def minline_glue : Flag<["-"], "minline-glue">, Group<m_Group>, + HelpText<"Emit indirect calls inline (AIX only) (default)">; + ---------------- hubert-reinterpretcast wrote:
I have some qualms about using the "inline-glue" for the option name. The IBM XL option (`-q[no]inlglue`) also interacts with whether or not "long calls" (i.e., calls expected to be across load modules) are done via an inline sequence instead of branching to glink code. How about `-maix-use-ptrgl` or `-maix-indirect-via-ptrgl`? https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/193786 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
