From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id E7E443851C12; Wed, 27 May 2020 13:19:57 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org E7E443851C12 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1590585597; bh=+Q4NRsn6TkR8cnjelVkcNauRkYQcyPb9beE46F5GI1w=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=GYtxcjcOZgIF19gvOSn1nzykAnzS63esFesDdFILn6ImcXq0su97q168Ee3eGcNac sI1QDUldvxluVPM143Frw0xMqUtBDSAynATEAcQ3h8BJj4Qsz8ZqS5JAkq8xJlitNg FeFyzKjnNiBJPAzzfb6+qoo9+aehSEh0rIHjpRgk= From: "bule1 at huawei dot com" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug target/95285] AArch64:aarch64 medium code model proposal Date: Wed, 27 May 2020 13:19:57 +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: 11.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: bule1 at huawei dot com X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 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: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: 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 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 May 2020 13:19:58 -0000 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D95285 --- Comment #14 from Bu Le --- > > Anyway, my point is that the size of single data does't affact the fact= that > > medium code model is missing in aarch64 and aarch64 is lack of PIC large > > code model. >=20 > What is missing is efficient support for >4GB of data, right? How that is > implemented is a different question - my point is that it does not requir= e a > new code model. It would be much better if it just worked without users e= ven > needing to think about code models. >=20 > Also, what is the purpose of a large fpic model? Are there any applicatio= ns > that use shared libraries larger than 4GB? Yes, I understand, and I am grateful for you suggestion. I have to say it is not a critical problem. After all, most applications works fine with curree= nt code modes.=20 But there are some cases, like CESM with certain configuration, or my test case, which cannot be compiled with current gcc compiler on aarch64. Unfortunately, applications that large than 4GB is quiet normal in HPC feil= d. In the meantime, x86 and llvm-aarch64 can compile it, with medium or large-= pic code model. That is the purpose I am proposing it. By adding this feature, = we can make a step forward for aarch64 gcc compiler, making it more powerful a= nd robust. Clear enough for your concern?=20 And for the implementation you suggested, I believe it is a promissing plan= . I would like to try to implement it first. Might take weeks of development. I will see what I can get. I will give you update with progress. Thanks for the suggestion again.=