From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24353 invoked by alias); 12 Nov 2014 21:02:56 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 24343 invoked by uid 89); 12 Nov 2014 21:02:56 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Wed, 12 Nov 2014 21:02:55 +0000 Received: from int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.24]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id sACL2sAK030377 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 12 Nov 2014 16:02:54 -0500 Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (ovpn-116-116.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.116]) by int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id sACL2qtd023693 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 12 Nov 2014 16:02:53 -0500 Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id sACL2o4F029863; Wed, 12 Nov 2014 22:02:51 +0100 Received: (from jakub@localhost) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.14.9/8.14.9/Submit) id sACL2n8X029857; Wed, 12 Nov 2014 22:02:49 +0100 Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2014 21:11:00 -0000 From: Jakub Jelinek To: "H.J. Lu" Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, Uros Bizjak Subject: Re: PATCH: PR target/63815: [5 Regression] g++.dg/other/pr53811.C fails with -mcmodel=large -fpic Message-ID: <20141112210249.GQ5026@tucnak.redhat.com> Reply-To: Jakub Jelinek References: <20141112204317.GA13104@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20141112204317.GA13104@intel.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2014-11/txt/msg01326.txt.bz2 On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 12:43:17PM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote: > @@ -42686,8 +42692,12 @@ x86_output_mi_thunk (FILE *file, tree, HOST_WIDE_INT delta, > else > { > if (ix86_cmodel == CM_LARGE_PIC && SYMBOLIC_CONST (fnaddr)) > - fnaddr = legitimize_pic_address (fnaddr, > - gen_rtx_REG (Pmode, tmp_regno)); > + { > + SET_REGNO (pic_offset_table_rtx, R11_REG); If pic_offset_table_rtx has never been initialized, how you can use SET_REGNO on it? Shouldn't that be pic_offset_table_rtx = gen_raw_REG (Pmode, R11_REG); or similar? Or is it initialized from some earlier function emitted, just with a different reg? Jakub