From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13529 invoked by alias); 3 Feb 2015 22:19:43 -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 13518 invoked by uid 89); 3 Feb 2015 22:19:42 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KAM_STOCKGEN,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=no 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; Tue, 03 Feb 2015 22:19:42 +0000 Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t13MJedN011704 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 3 Feb 2015 17:19:40 -0500 Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (ovpn-116-42.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.42]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t13MJc3Z025456 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 3 Feb 2015 17:19:40 -0500 Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id t13MJamL007602; Tue, 3 Feb 2015 23:19:37 +0100 Received: (from jakub@localhost) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.14.9/8.14.9/Submit) id t13MJZ8j007601; Tue, 3 Feb 2015 23:19:35 +0100 Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2015 22:19:00 -0000 From: Jakub Jelinek To: "H.J. Lu" Cc: Sriraman Tallam , Uros Bizjak , "gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org" , David Li , Cary Coutant Subject: Re: [PATCH x86_64] Optimize access to globals in "-fpie -pie" builds with copy relocations Message-ID: <20150203221935.GA1746@tucnak.redhat.com> Reply-To: Jakub Jelinek References: <20150203193615.GZ1746@tucnak.redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2015-02/txt/msg00171.txt.bz2 On Tue, Feb 03, 2015 at 02:03:14PM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote: > So we aren't SYMBOL_REF_EXTERNAL_P nor > SYMBOL_REF_LOCAL_P. What do we reference? That is reasonable. There is no guarantee the extern weak symbol is local, it could very well be non-local. All that you know about the symbols is that its address is non-NULL in that case. Jakub