On Sat, Apr 25, 2020 at 02:15:49PM -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote:

On Sat, Apr 25, 2020 at 08:53:13PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:

quoted

On Sat, Apr 25, 2020 at 01:37:01PM -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote:

quoted

That is a lot more typing then
	asm("");

That's why a macro with a hopefully more descriptive name would be
telling more than a mere asm("").

My point is that you should explain at *every use* of this why you cannot
have tail calls *there*.  This is very unusual, after all.

There are *very* few places where you want to prevent tail calls, that's
why there is no attribute for it.


Segher

Well, there is -fno-optimize-sibling-calls, but we wouldn't be able to
use it via the optimize attribute for the same reason we couldn't use
no-stack-protector.