From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.158.5]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EB7283857B82; Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:58:37 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org EB7283857B82 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098419.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.17.1.5/8.17.1.5) with ESMTP id 2646oaNB006594; Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:58:37 GMT Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3h3u9x0539-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 04 Jul 2022 06:58:37 +0000 Received: from m0098419.ppops.net (m0098419.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.17.1.5/8.17.1.5) with ESMTP id 2646sJZw023427; Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:58:36 GMT Received: from ppma03fra.de.ibm.com (6b.4a.5195.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [149.81.74.107]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3h3u9x052u-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 04 Jul 2022 06:58:36 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma03fra.de.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma03fra.de.ibm.com (8.16.1.2/8.16.1.2) with SMTP id 2646osTr032381; Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:58:35 GMT Received: from b06cxnps4076.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06relay13.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.109.198]) by ppma03fra.de.ibm.com with ESMTP id 3h2dn8spyn-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 04 Jul 2022 06:58:34 +0000 Received: from d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.58]) by b06cxnps4076.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 2646wW7w21299646 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:58:32 GMT Received: from d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9169B4C044; Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:58:32 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7AB24C040; Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:58:31 +0000 (GMT) Received: from pike.rch.stglabs.ibm.com (unknown [9.5.12.127]) by d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:58:31 +0000 (GMT) From: Jiufu Guo To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Cc: segher@kernel.crashing.org, dje.gcc@gmail.com, linkw@gcc.gnu.org, guojiufu@linux.ibm.com Subject: [PATCH] HIGH part of symbol ref is invalid for constant pool Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2022 14:58:31 +0800 Message-Id: <20220704065831.55961-1-guojiufu@linux.ibm.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.17.1 X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: G3XNQuPQVCBSw_YUUD1JNkCYxr_3u6fw X-Proofpoint-GUID: pDv173JGZGgIwYR9EpUBOYqO9814cOFO X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.205,Aquarius:18.0.883,Hydra:6.0.517,FMLib:17.11.122.1 definitions=2022-07-04_05,2022-06-28_01,2022-06-22_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 malwarescore=0 impostorscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 adultscore=0 suspectscore=0 mlxscore=0 priorityscore=1501 clxscore=1011 phishscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2204290000 definitions=main-2207040027 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-12.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_EF, GIT_PATCH_0, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gcc-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 04 Jul 2022 06:58:39 -0000 The high part of the symbol address is invalid for the constant pool. In function rs6000_cannot_force_const_mem, we already return true for "HIGH with UNSPEC" rtx. During debug GCC, I found that rs6000_cannot_force_const_mem is called for some other HIGH code rtx expressions which also indicate the high part of a symbol_ref. For example: (high:DI (const:DI (plus:DI (symbol_ref:DI ("xx") (const_int 12 [0xc]))))) (high:DI (symbol_ref:DI ("var_1")..))) In the below case, this kind of rtx could occur in the middle of optimizations pass but was not dumped to a file. So, no test case is attached to this patch. extern const unsigned int __decPOWERS[10]; void decSetCoeff (int *residue, const unsigned int *up) { unsigned int half = (unsigned int) __decPOWERS1[3] >> 1; if (*up >= half) *residue = 7; return; } This patch updates rs6000_cannot_force_const_mem to return true for rtx with HIGH code. Bootstrapped and regtested on ppc64le and ppc64. Is it ok for trunk? BR, Jiufu Guo gcc/ChangeLog: * config/rs6000/rs6000.cc (rs6000_cannot_force_const_mem): Return true for HIGH code rtx. --- gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.cc | 7 +++++-- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.cc b/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.cc index 3ff16b8ae04..c2b10669627 100644 --- a/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.cc +++ b/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.cc @@ -9707,8 +9707,11 @@ rs6000_init_stack_protect_guard (void) static bool rs6000_cannot_force_const_mem (machine_mode mode ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED, rtx x) { - if (GET_CODE (x) == HIGH - && GET_CODE (XEXP (x, 0)) == UNSPEC) + /* High part of a symbol ref/address can not be put into constant pool. e.g. + (high:DI (symbol_ref:DI ("var")..)) or + (high:DI (unspec:DI [(symbol_ref/u:DI ("*.LC0")..) + (high:DI (const:DI (plus:DI (symbol_ref:DI ("xx")) (const_int 12)))). */ + if (GET_CODE (x) == HIGH) return true; /* A TLS symbol in the TOC cannot contain a sum. */ -- 2.17.1