From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
 id 5EBC73858C27; Sun,  6 Feb 2022 15:46:07 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 5EBC73858C27
From: "iains at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/104117] [9,10,11,12 Regression] Darwin ppc64 uses
 invalid non-PIC address to access constants (in PIC code).
Date: Sun, 06 Feb 2022 15:46:07 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.3.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: link-failure, ra, wrong-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: iains at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 10.4
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-104117-4-KIqlzCZKt2@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-104117-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-104117-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 06 Feb 2022 15:46:07 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D104117

--- Comment #20 from Iain Sandoe <iains at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #15)
> (In reply to Vladimir Makarov from comment #13)
> > I think there are two code spots whose pitfalls resulted in the PR.

> > --- a/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.c
> > +++ b/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.c
> > @@ -8202,7 +8202,7 @@ legitimate_lo_sum_address_p (machine_mode mode, r=
tx x,
> > int strict)
> >      {
> >        bool large_toc_ok;
> >=20
> > -      if (DEFAULT_ABI =3D=3D ABI_V4 && flag_pic)
> > +      if ((DEFAULT_ABI =3D=3D ABI_V4 || DEFAULT_ABI =3D=3D ABI_DARWIN)=
 && flag_pic)
> >         return false;

On testing, this is not sufficient - one ends up with ICEs when we reject a
valid (UNSPEC-wrapped) address here.  So I think that the slightly more
elaborate target changes are required - but the LRA change seems fine!

... reg-straps on this old h/w take > 1 day .. so some more time will be ne=
eded
for a complete answer.=