From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-422133-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 14238 invoked by alias); 13 May 2013 09:15:56 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 14213 invoked by uid 48); 13 May 2013 09:15:52 -0000
From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/57260] Generated R_MIPS_GOT_MIPS relocation for direct function call while compiling with -O2 on MIPS N64
Date: Mon, 13 May 2013 09:15:00 -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: 4.9.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_severity
Message-ID: <bug-57260-4-RpD699gzVe@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-57260-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-57260-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2013-05/txt/msg00806.txt.bz2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57260

Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Severity|major                       |normal

--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> Looks like sibcalls are incorrectly done.

Or maybe not since it is no longer a call but rather a sibcall which means it
can never be using call16 here since it is not a real call. 

Smallest testcase:
int shouldbecall16(void);
int g(void) { return shouldbecall16(); }
---- CUT ---

        lui     $3,%hi(%neg(%gp_rel(g)))
        daddu   $3,$3,$25
        daddiu  $3,$3,%lo(%neg(%gp_rel(g)))
        ld      $25,%got_disp(shouldbecall16)($3)
        .reloc  1f,R_MIPS_JALR,shouldbecall16
1:      jr      $25
        nop


Notice it is a jr rather than a jalr.

I think this is correct behavior either way really.  I think Xorg's sources are
depending on undefined behavior dealing with undefined symbols.