[clang] [llvm] XCOFF no inline ptr glue (PR #193786)

[Hubert Tong via llvm-commits]

================
@@ -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