[SOLVED] How to get rid of __i686.get_pc_thunk.bx?
ProgrammingThis forum is for all programming questions.
The question does not have to be directly related to Linux and any language is fair game.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
I tried to compile simple hello world program using such flags as -finline-functions, -finline-functions-called-once, but they don't seem to inline __i686.get_pc_thunk.bx. How can i force gcc do this?
you can't force gcc to inline this "function", because it is added by the program linker (ld). The purpose of this thunk is to determine the IP (instruction pointer) value of the following instruction and it is usually used for position-independent code.
Though, if you have the following assembly snipped:
Yes, i know how it is implemented. I came across this function while looking at disassembly. And just because i know this, i thought that it would be more efficient to replace function call with "mov (%esp),%ebx". It's just strange why linker can't optimize it this way...
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.