[PATCH 0/2] PIC cleanup

[PATCH 0/2] PIC cleanup

[Vineet Gupta]

Hi,

A couple of cleanup patches when trying to understand -mexplicit-relocs
and code model.

 - 1/2 should be strightfwd
 - 2/2 might be slightly controversial.

Tested with a bunch of rv32/rv64 configs: same results before after,
granted pic might not really be getting tested here.

               ========= Summary of gcc testsuite =========
                            | # of unexpected case / # of unique unexpected case
                            |          gcc |          g++ |     gfortran |
 rv64imafdc/  lp64d/ medlow |   12 /    10 |11016 /  2776 |    0 /     0 |
 rv32imafdc/ ilp32d/ medlow |    9 /     7 |10959 /  2764 |    0 /     0 |
   rv32imac/  ilp32/ medlow |    9 /     7 |10959 /  2764 |    0 /     0 |
   rv64imac/   lp64/ medlow |   13 /    11 |11016 /  2776 |    0 /     0 |

Thx,
-Vineet

Vineet Gupta (2):
  RISC-V: remove deprecate pic code model macro
  RISC-V: remove CM_PIC as it doesn't do much

 gcc/config/riscv/riscv-c.cc   | 7 -------
 gcc/config/riscv/riscv-opts.h | 3 +--
 gcc/config/riscv/riscv.cc     | 2 +-
 3 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)

-- 
2.32.0

[PATCH 1/2] RISC-V: remove deprecate pic code model macro

[Vineet Gupta]

Came across this deprecated symbol when looking around for
-mexplicit-relocs handling in code

Signed-off-by: Vineet Gupta <vineetg@rivosinc.com>
---
 gcc/config/riscv/riscv-c.cc | 3 ---
 1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-c.cc b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-c.cc
index eb7ef09297e9..bba72cf77a82 100644
--- a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-c.cc
+++ b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-c.cc
@@ -93,9 +93,6 @@ riscv_cpu_cpp_builtins (cpp_reader *pfile)
       break;
 
     case CM_PIC:
-      /* __riscv_cmodel_pic is deprecated, and will removed in next GCC release.
-	 see https://github.com/riscv/riscv-c-api-doc/pull/11  */
-      builtin_define ("__riscv_cmodel_pic");
       /* FALLTHROUGH. */
 
     case CM_MEDANY:
-- 
2.32.0

[PATCH 2/2] RISC-V: remove CM_PIC as it doesn't do much

[Vineet Gupta]

CM_PIC is no longer doing anything directly. Removing it might 
potentially affect USE_LOAD_ADDRESS_MACRO() but seems unlikely. 

Signed-off-by: Vineet Gupta <vineetg@rivosinc.com>
---
 gcc/config/riscv/riscv-c.cc   | 4 ----
 gcc/config/riscv/riscv-opts.h | 3 +--
 gcc/config/riscv/riscv.cc     | 2 +-
 3 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

diff --git a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-c.cc b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-c.cc
index bba72cf77a82..7064fcf142fe 100644
--- a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-c.cc
+++ b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-c.cc
@@ -92,13 +92,9 @@ riscv_cpu_cpp_builtins (cpp_reader *pfile)
       builtin_define ("__riscv_cmodel_medlow");
       break;
 
-    case CM_PIC:
-      /* FALLTHROUGH. */
-
     case CM_MEDANY:
       builtin_define ("__riscv_cmodel_medany");
       break;
-
     }
 
   if (TARGET_MIN_VLEN != 0)
diff --git a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-opts.h b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-opts.h
index 85e869e62e3a..ce3237beca7a 100644
--- a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-opts.h
+++ b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-opts.h
@@ -34,8 +34,7 @@ extern enum riscv_abi_type riscv_abi;
 
 enum riscv_code_model {
   CM_MEDLOW,
-  CM_MEDANY,
-  CM_PIC
+  CM_MEDANY
 };
 extern enum riscv_code_model riscv_cmodel;
 
diff --git a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.cc b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.cc
index 7c120eaa8e33..a239fe43047c 100644
--- a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.cc
+++ b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.cc
@@ -5162,7 +5162,7 @@ riscv_option_override (void)
   init_machine_status = &riscv_init_machine_status;
 
   if (flag_pic)
-    riscv_cmodel = CM_PIC;
+    riscv_cmodel = CM_MEDANY;
 
   /* We get better code with explicit relocs for CM_MEDLOW, but
      worse code for the others (for now).  Pick the best default.  */
-- 
2.32.0

Re: [PATCH 1/2] RISC-V: remove deprecate pic code model macro

[Palmer Dabbelt]

On Tue, 30 Aug 2022 10:48:29 PDT (-0700), Vineet Gupta wrote:
> Came across this deprecated symbol when looking around for
> -mexplicit-relocs handling in code
>
> Signed-off-by: Vineet Gupta <vineetg@rivosinc.com>
> ---
>  gcc/config/riscv/riscv-c.cc | 3 ---
>  1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-c.cc b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-c.cc
> index eb7ef09297e9..bba72cf77a82 100644
> --- a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-c.cc
> +++ b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-c.cc
> @@ -93,9 +93,6 @@ riscv_cpu_cpp_builtins (cpp_reader *pfile)
>        break;
>
>      case CM_PIC:
> -      /* __riscv_cmodel_pic is deprecated, and will removed in next GCC release.
> -	 see https://github.com/riscv/riscv-c-api-doc/pull/11  */
> -      builtin_define ("__riscv_cmodel_pic");
>        /* FALLTHROUGH. */
>
>      case CM_MEDANY:

It looks like some of the tests
(gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-3.c, for example) are checking
for __riscv_cmodel_pic.  From looking at them I'd expect them to fail,
but even if they're not we should clean them up.

Re: [PATCH 2/2] RISC-V: remove CM_PIC as it doesn't do much

[Palmer Dabbelt]

On Tue, 30 Aug 2022 10:48:30 PDT (-0700), Vineet Gupta wrote:
> CM_PIC is no longer doing anything directly. Removing it might
> potentially affect USE_LOAD_ADDRESS_MACRO() but seems unlikely.

At least in the short term, there's kind of a mess here that needs to 
get sorted out but just removing CM_PIC doesn't really get us there.

> Signed-off-by: Vineet Gupta <vineetg@rivosinc.com>
> ---
>  gcc/config/riscv/riscv-c.cc   | 4 ----
>  gcc/config/riscv/riscv-opts.h | 3 +--
>  gcc/config/riscv/riscv.cc     | 2 +-
>  3 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-c.cc b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-c.cc
> index bba72cf77a82..7064fcf142fe 100644
> --- a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-c.cc
> +++ b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-c.cc
> @@ -92,13 +92,9 @@ riscv_cpu_cpp_builtins (cpp_reader *pfile)
>        builtin_define ("__riscv_cmodel_medlow");
>        break;
>
> -    case CM_PIC:
> -      /* FALLTHROUGH. */
> -
>      case CM_MEDANY:
>        builtin_define ("__riscv_cmodel_medany");
>        break;
> -
>      }
>
>    if (TARGET_MIN_VLEN != 0)
> diff --git a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-opts.h b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-opts.h
> index 85e869e62e3a..ce3237beca7a 100644
> --- a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-opts.h
> +++ b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-opts.h
> @@ -34,8 +34,7 @@ extern enum riscv_abi_type riscv_abi;
>
>  enum riscv_code_model {
>    CM_MEDLOW,
> -  CM_MEDANY,
> -  CM_PIC
> +  CM_MEDANY
>  };
>  extern enum riscv_code_model riscv_cmodel;
>
> diff --git a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.cc b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.cc
> index 7c120eaa8e33..a239fe43047c 100644
> --- a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.cc
> +++ b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.cc
> @@ -5162,7 +5162,7 @@ riscv_option_override (void)
>    init_machine_status = &riscv_init_machine_status;
>
>    if (flag_pic)
> -    riscv_cmodel = CM_PIC;
> +    riscv_cmodel = CM_MEDANY;
>
>    /* We get better code with explicit relocs for CM_MEDLOW, but
>       worse code for the others (for now).  Pick the best default.  */

I'm fine either way on this one: having CM_PIC gone makes it a bit more 
likely to confuse CM_MEDANY with PIC, but flag_pic is overriding 
riscv_cmodel anyway so this isn't really used and deleting code is 
always a plus.

Re: [PATCH 1/2] RISC-V: remove deprecate pic code model macro

[Kito Cheng]

Could you also clean up all __riscv_cmodel_pic checking in
gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-*.c?

On Wed, Aug 31, 2022 at 10:58 PM Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@rivosinc.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 30 Aug 2022 10:48:29 PDT (-0700), Vineet Gupta wrote:
> > Came across this deprecated symbol when looking around for
> > -mexplicit-relocs handling in code
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Vineet Gupta <vineetg@rivosinc.com>
> > ---
> >  gcc/config/riscv/riscv-c.cc | 3 ---
> >  1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-c.cc b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-c.cc
> > index eb7ef09297e9..bba72cf77a82 100644
> > --- a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-c.cc
> > +++ b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-c.cc
> > @@ -93,9 +93,6 @@ riscv_cpu_cpp_builtins (cpp_reader *pfile)
> >        break;
> >
> >      case CM_PIC:
> > -      /* __riscv_cmodel_pic is deprecated, and will removed in next GCC release.
> > -      see https://github.com/riscv/riscv-c-api-doc/pull/11  */
> > -      builtin_define ("__riscv_cmodel_pic");
> >        /* FALLTHROUGH. */
> >
> >      case CM_MEDANY:
>
> It looks like some of the tests
> (gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-3.c, for example) are checking
> for __riscv_cmodel_pic.  From looking at them I'd expect them to fail,
> but even if they're not we should clean them up.

Re: [PATCH 1/2] RISC-V: remove deprecate pic code model macro

[Vineet Gupta]

On 8/31/22 07:57, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Aug 2022 10:48:29 PDT (-0700), Vineet Gupta wrote:
>> Came across this deprecated symbol when looking around for
>> -mexplicit-relocs handling in code
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Vineet Gupta <vineetg@rivosinc.com>
>> ---
>>  gcc/config/riscv/riscv-c.cc | 3 ---
>>  1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-c.cc b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-c.cc
>> index eb7ef09297e9..bba72cf77a82 100644
>> --- a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-c.cc
>> +++ b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-c.cc
>> @@ -93,9 +93,6 @@ riscv_cpu_cpp_builtins (cpp_reader *pfile)
>>        break;
>>
>>      case CM_PIC:
>> -      /* __riscv_cmodel_pic is deprecated, and will removed in next 
>> GCC release.
>> -     see https://github.com/riscv/riscv-c-api-doc/pull/11  */
>> -      builtin_define ("__riscv_cmodel_pic");
>>        /* FALLTHROUGH. */
>>
>>      case CM_MEDANY:
>
> It looks like some of the tests
> (gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-3.c, for example) are checking
> for __riscv_cmodel_pic.  From looking at them I'd expect them to fail,
> but even if they're not we should clean them up.

Aah, I did miss removing them and looks like there was a snafu in my 
test setup as well.
I'm rerunning the tests with the fix and will post a v2 after tests come 
out clean.

Thx,
-Vineet

Re: [PATCH 2/2] RISC-V: remove CM_PIC as it doesn't do much

[Vineet Gupta]

On 8/31/22 07:57, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
>>    if (flag_pic)
>> -    riscv_cmodel = CM_PIC;
>> +    riscv_cmodel = CM_MEDANY;
>>
>>    /* We get better code with explicit relocs for CM_MEDLOW, but
>>       worse code for the others (for now).  Pick the best default.  */
>
> I'm fine either way on this one: having CM_PIC gone makes it a bit 
> more likely to confuse CM_MEDANY with PIC, but flag_pic is overriding 
> riscv_cmodel anyway so this isn't really used and deleting code is 
> always a plus.

Indeed this was the most contentious part of removing CM_PIC, but it 
seems this is the way fwd. I'll add Kito's comment from [1] in code to 
make it more explicit.

[1]https://github.com/riscv-non-isa/riscv-c-api-doc/pull/11#issuecomment-686385585 


Thx,
-Vineett

[PATCH v2] RISC-V: remove deprecate pic code model macro

[Vineet Gupta]

Came across this deprecated symbol when looking around for
-mexplicit-relocs handling in code

Signed-off-by: Vineet Gupta <vineetg@rivosinc.com>
---
 gcc/config/riscv/riscv-c.cc               | 3 ---
 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-1.c | 3 ---
 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-2.c | 3 ---
 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-3.c | 3 ---
 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-4.c | 3 ---
 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-5.c | 3 ---
 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-6.c | 3 ---
 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-7.c | 3 ---
 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-8.c | 3 ---
 9 files changed, 27 deletions(-)

diff --git a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-c.cc b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-c.cc
index eb7ef09297e9..bba72cf77a82 100644
--- a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-c.cc
+++ b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-c.cc
@@ -93,9 +93,6 @@ riscv_cpu_cpp_builtins (cpp_reader *pfile)
       break;
 
     case CM_PIC:
-      /* __riscv_cmodel_pic is deprecated, and will removed in next GCC release.
-	 see https://github.com/riscv/riscv-c-api-doc/pull/11  */
-      builtin_define ("__riscv_cmodel_pic");
       /* FALLTHROUGH. */
 
     case CM_MEDANY:
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-1.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-1.c
index 2e57ce6b3954..9dddc1849635 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-1.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-1.c
@@ -57,9 +57,6 @@ int main () {
 #endif
 #if defined(__riscv_cmodel_medany)
 #error "__riscv_cmodel_medlow"
-#endif
-#if defined(__riscv_cmodel_pic)
-#error "__riscv_cmodel_medlow"
 #endif
 
   return 0;
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-2.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-2.c
index c85b3c9fd32a..755fe4ef7d8a 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-2.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-2.c
@@ -57,9 +57,6 @@ int main () {
 #endif
 #if !defined(__riscv_cmodel_medany)
 #error "__riscv_cmodel_medlow"
-#endif
-#if defined(__riscv_cmodel_pic)
-#error "__riscv_cmodel_medlow"
 #endif
 
   return 0;
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-3.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-3.c
index 82a89d415809..513645351c09 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-3.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-3.c
@@ -57,9 +57,6 @@ int main () {
 #endif
 #if !defined(__riscv_cmodel_medany)
 #error "__riscv_cmodel_medany"
-#endif
-#if !defined(__riscv_cmodel_pic)
-#error "__riscv_cmodel_pic"
 #endif
 
   return 0;
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-4.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-4.c
index 5868d39eb67a..76b6feec6b6f 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-4.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-4.c
@@ -57,9 +57,6 @@ int main () {
 #endif
 #if defined(__riscv_cmodel_medany)
 #error "__riscv_cmodel_medlow"
-#endif
-#if defined(__riscv_cmodel_pic)
-#error "__riscv_cmodel_medlow"
 #endif
 
   return 0;
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-5.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-5.c
index 4b2bd3835061..54a51508afbd 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-5.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-5.c
@@ -57,9 +57,6 @@ int main () {
 #endif
 #if !defined(__riscv_cmodel_medany)
 #error "__riscv_cmodel_medlow"
-#endif
-#if defined(__riscv_cmodel_pic)
-#error "__riscv_cmodel_medlow"
 #endif
 
   return 0;
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-6.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-6.c
index 8e5ea366bd5e..f61709f7bf32 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-6.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-6.c
@@ -57,9 +57,6 @@ int main () {
 #endif
 #if !defined(__riscv_cmodel_medany)
 #error "__riscv_cmodel_medany"
-#endif
-#if !defined(__riscv_cmodel_pic)
-#error "__riscv_cmodel_medpic"
 #endif
 
   return 0;
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-7.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-7.c
index 0bde299aef1a..41217554c4db 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-7.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-7.c
@@ -57,9 +57,6 @@ int main () {
 #endif
 #if defined(__riscv_cmodel_medany)
 #error "__riscv_cmodel_medlow"
-#endif
-#if defined(__riscv_cmodel_pic)
-#error "__riscv_cmodel_medlow"
 #endif
 
   return 0;
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-8.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-8.c
index 18aa591a6039..982056a53438 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-8.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-8.c
@@ -57,9 +57,6 @@ int main () {
 #endif
 #if !defined(__riscv_cmodel_medany)
 #error "__riscv_cmodel_medlow"
-#endif
-#if defined(__riscv_cmodel_pic)
-#error "__riscv_cmodel_medlow"
 #endif
 
   return 0;
-- 
2.32.0

Re: [PATCH 2/2] RISC-V: remove CM_PIC as it doesn't do much

[Vineet Gupta]

On 8/31/22 13:39, Vineet Gupta wrote:
> 
> 
> On 8/31/22 07:57, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
>>>    if (flag_pic)
>>> -    riscv_cmodel = CM_PIC;
>>> +    riscv_cmodel = CM_MEDANY;
>>>
>>>    /* We get better code with explicit relocs for CM_MEDLOW, but
>>>       worse code for the others (for now).  Pick the best default.  */
>>
>> I'm fine either way on this one: having CM_PIC gone makes it a bit 
>> more likely to confuse CM_MEDANY with PIC, but flag_pic is overriding 
>> riscv_cmodel anyway so this isn't really used and deleting code is 
>> always a plus.
> 
> Indeed this was the most contentious part of removing CM_PIC, but it 
> seems this is the way fwd. I'll add Kito's comment from [1] in code to 
> make it more explicit.
> 
> [1]https://github.com/riscv-non-isa/riscv-c-api-doc/pull/11#issuecomment-686385585 

I think I'll punt on this one, in the short-term. The reason being it 
affects USE_LOAD_ADDRESS_MACRO.

#define USE_LOAD_ADDRESS_MACRO(sym)				\
   (!TARGET_EXPLICIT_RELOCS &&					\
    ((flag_pic							\
      && ((SYMBOL_REF_P (sym) && SYMBOL_REF_LOCAL_P (sym))	\
	 || ((GET_CODE (sym) == CONST)				\
	     && SYMBOL_REF_P (XEXP (XEXP (sym, 0),0))		\
	     && SYMBOL_REF_LOCAL_P (XEXP (XEXP (sym, 0),0)))))	\
      || riscv_cmodel == CM_MEDANY))

With the patch, PIC implies CM_MEDANY and thus will change codegen for 
pic non-local symbols to also use the load address macro. I think we 
want to go in the opposite direction, i.e. wean away from the asm macros 
and have gcc codegen natively. It seems there are bugs in that area so 
once we flush them out (after creating a few as I don't know of any 
existing documented ones) this will get cleaned out.

Thx
-Vineet

Re: [PATCH v2] RISC-V: remove deprecate pic code model macro

[Andreas Schwab]

On Sep 02 2022, Vineet Gupta wrote:

> diff --git a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-c.cc b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-c.cc
> index eb7ef09297e9..bba72cf77a82 100644
> --- a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-c.cc
> +++ b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-c.cc
> @@ -93,9 +93,6 @@ riscv_cpu_cpp_builtins (cpp_reader *pfile)
>        break;
>  
>      case CM_PIC:
> -      /* __riscv_cmodel_pic is deprecated, and will removed in next GCC release.
> -	 see https://github.com/riscv/riscv-c-api-doc/pull/11  */
> -      builtin_define ("__riscv_cmodel_pic");
>        /* FALLTHROUGH. */
>  
>      case CM_MEDANY:

If there is nothing left between the case labels the fallthrough comment
is no longer needed.

-- 
Andreas Schwab, schwab@linux-m68k.org
GPG Key fingerprint = 7578 EB47 D4E5 4D69 2510  2552 DF73 E780 A9DA AEC1
"And now for something completely different."

[PATCH v3] RISC-V: remove deprecate pic code model macro

[Vineet Gupta]

Came across this deprecated symbol when looking around for
-mexplicit-relocs handling in code

Signed-off-by: Vineet Gupta <vineetg@rivosinc.com>
---
 gcc/config/riscv/riscv-c.cc               | 5 -----
 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-1.c | 3 ---
 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-2.c | 3 ---
 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-3.c | 3 ---
 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-4.c | 3 ---
 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-5.c | 3 ---
 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-6.c | 3 ---
 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-7.c | 3 ---
 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-8.c | 3 ---
 9 files changed, 29 deletions(-)

diff --git a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-c.cc b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-c.cc
index eb7ef09297e9..8d55ad598a9c 100644
--- a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-c.cc
+++ b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-c.cc
@@ -93,11 +93,6 @@ riscv_cpu_cpp_builtins (cpp_reader *pfile)
       break;
 
     case CM_PIC:
-      /* __riscv_cmodel_pic is deprecated, and will removed in next GCC release.
-	 see https://github.com/riscv/riscv-c-api-doc/pull/11  */
-      builtin_define ("__riscv_cmodel_pic");
-      /* FALLTHROUGH. */
-
     case CM_MEDANY:
       builtin_define ("__riscv_cmodel_medany");
       break;
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-1.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-1.c
index 2e57ce6b3954..9dddc1849635 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-1.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-1.c
@@ -57,9 +57,6 @@ int main () {
 #endif
 #if defined(__riscv_cmodel_medany)
 #error "__riscv_cmodel_medlow"
-#endif
-#if defined(__riscv_cmodel_pic)
-#error "__riscv_cmodel_medlow"
 #endif
 
   return 0;
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-2.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-2.c
index c85b3c9fd32a..755fe4ef7d8a 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-2.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-2.c
@@ -57,9 +57,6 @@ int main () {
 #endif
 #if !defined(__riscv_cmodel_medany)
 #error "__riscv_cmodel_medlow"
-#endif
-#if defined(__riscv_cmodel_pic)
-#error "__riscv_cmodel_medlow"
 #endif
 
   return 0;
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-3.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-3.c
index 82a89d415809..513645351c09 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-3.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-3.c
@@ -57,9 +57,6 @@ int main () {
 #endif
 #if !defined(__riscv_cmodel_medany)
 #error "__riscv_cmodel_medany"
-#endif
-#if !defined(__riscv_cmodel_pic)
-#error "__riscv_cmodel_pic"
 #endif
 
   return 0;
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-4.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-4.c
index 5868d39eb67a..76b6feec6b6f 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-4.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-4.c
@@ -57,9 +57,6 @@ int main () {
 #endif
 #if defined(__riscv_cmodel_medany)
 #error "__riscv_cmodel_medlow"
-#endif
-#if defined(__riscv_cmodel_pic)
-#error "__riscv_cmodel_medlow"
 #endif
 
   return 0;
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-5.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-5.c
index 4b2bd3835061..54a51508afbd 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-5.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-5.c
@@ -57,9 +57,6 @@ int main () {
 #endif
 #if !defined(__riscv_cmodel_medany)
 #error "__riscv_cmodel_medlow"
-#endif
-#if defined(__riscv_cmodel_pic)
-#error "__riscv_cmodel_medlow"
 #endif
 
   return 0;
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-6.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-6.c
index 8e5ea366bd5e..f61709f7bf32 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-6.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-6.c
@@ -57,9 +57,6 @@ int main () {
 #endif
 #if !defined(__riscv_cmodel_medany)
 #error "__riscv_cmodel_medany"
-#endif
-#if !defined(__riscv_cmodel_pic)
-#error "__riscv_cmodel_medpic"
 #endif
 
   return 0;
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-7.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-7.c
index 0bde299aef1a..41217554c4db 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-7.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-7.c
@@ -57,9 +57,6 @@ int main () {
 #endif
 #if defined(__riscv_cmodel_medany)
 #error "__riscv_cmodel_medlow"
-#endif
-#if defined(__riscv_cmodel_pic)
-#error "__riscv_cmodel_medlow"
 #endif
 
   return 0;
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-8.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-8.c
index 18aa591a6039..982056a53438 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-8.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-8.c
@@ -57,9 +57,6 @@ int main () {
 #endif
 #if !defined(__riscv_cmodel_medany)
 #error "__riscv_cmodel_medlow"
-#endif
-#if defined(__riscv_cmodel_pic)
-#error "__riscv_cmodel_medlow"
 #endif
 
   return 0;
-- 
2.32.0

[PATCH] RISC-V: make USE_LOAD_ADDRESS_MACRO easier to understand

[Vineet Gupta]

The current macro has several && and || making it really hard to understand
the first time.

Signed-off-by: Vineet Gupta <vineetg@rivosinc.com>
---
Since we are on this topic, perhaps get this simplification too.

But I'm not sure if the current checking of local symbol can be simplified
a bit. Isn't the first line enough for GET_CODE == const case too ?

---
 gcc/config/riscv/riscv.h | 13 +++++++------
 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.h b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.h
index eb1284e56d69..3e3f67ef8270 100644
--- a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.h
+++ b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.h
@@ -749,18 +749,19 @@ typedef struct {
 #define CASE_VECTOR_MODE SImode
 #define CASE_VECTOR_PC_RELATIVE (riscv_cmodel != CM_MEDLOW)
 
+#define LOCAL_SYM(sym)							\
+     ((SYMBOL_REF_P (sym) && SYMBOL_REF_LOCAL_P (sym))			\
+	 || ((GET_CODE (sym) == CONST)					\
+	     && SYMBOL_REF_P (XEXP (XEXP (sym, 0),0))			\
+	     && SYMBOL_REF_LOCAL_P (XEXP (XEXP (sym, 0),0))))
+
 /* The load-address macro is used for PC-relative addressing of symbols
    that bind locally.  Don't use it for symbols that should be addressed
    via the GOT.  Also, avoid it for CM_MEDLOW, where LUI addressing
    currently results in more opportunities for linker relaxation.  */
 #define USE_LOAD_ADDRESS_MACRO(sym)					\
   (!TARGET_EXPLICIT_RELOCS &&						\
-   ((flag_pic								\
-     && ((SYMBOL_REF_P (sym) && SYMBOL_REF_LOCAL_P (sym))		\
-	 || ((GET_CODE (sym) == CONST)					\
-	     && SYMBOL_REF_P (XEXP (XEXP (sym, 0),0))			\
-	     && SYMBOL_REF_LOCAL_P (XEXP (XEXP (sym, 0),0)))))		\
-     || riscv_cmodel == CM_MEDANY))
+   ((flag_pic && LOCAL_SYM(sym)) || riscv_cmodel == CM_MEDANY))
 
 /* Define this as 1 if `char' should by default be signed; else as 0.  */
 #define DEFAULT_SIGNED_CHAR 0
-- 
2.32.0

Re: [PATCH] RISC-V: make USE_LOAD_ADDRESS_MACRO easier to understand

[Kito Cheng]

Committed with ChangeLog and minor naming tweaking.


> But I'm not sure if the current checking of local symbol can be simplified
> a bit. Isn't the first line enough for GET_CODE == const case too ?

SYMBOL_REF_P not work for CONST, SYMBOL_REF_P is just checking
GET_CODE is SYMBOL_REF, and SYMBOL_REF_LOCAL_P will also ICE if you
feed something other than SYMBOL_REF when checking enabled...

On Sat, Sep 3, 2022 at 7:08 AM Vineet Gupta <vineetg@rivosinc.com> wrote:
>
> The current macro has several && and || making it really hard to understand
> the first time.
>
> Signed-off-by: Vineet Gupta <vineetg@rivosinc.com>
> ---
> Since we are on this topic, perhaps get this simplification too.
>
> But I'm not sure if the current checking of local symbol can be simplified
> a bit. Isn't the first line enough for GET_CODE == const case too ?
>
> ---
>  gcc/config/riscv/riscv.h | 13 +++++++------
>  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.h b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.h
> index eb1284e56d69..3e3f67ef8270 100644
> --- a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.h
> +++ b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.h
> @@ -749,18 +749,19 @@ typedef struct {
>  #define CASE_VECTOR_MODE SImode
>  #define CASE_VECTOR_PC_RELATIVE (riscv_cmodel != CM_MEDLOW)
>
> +#define LOCAL_SYM(sym)                                                 \
> +     ((SYMBOL_REF_P (sym) && SYMBOL_REF_LOCAL_P (sym))                 \
> +        || ((GET_CODE (sym) == CONST)                                  \
> +            && SYMBOL_REF_P (XEXP (XEXP (sym, 0),0))                   \
> +            && SYMBOL_REF_LOCAL_P (XEXP (XEXP (sym, 0),0))))
> +
>  /* The load-address macro is used for PC-relative addressing of symbols
>     that bind locally.  Don't use it for symbols that should be addressed
>     via the GOT.  Also, avoid it for CM_MEDLOW, where LUI addressing
>     currently results in more opportunities for linker relaxation.  */
>  #define USE_LOAD_ADDRESS_MACRO(sym)                                    \
>    (!TARGET_EXPLICIT_RELOCS &&                                          \
> -   ((flag_pic                                                          \
> -     && ((SYMBOL_REF_P (sym) && SYMBOL_REF_LOCAL_P (sym))              \
> -        || ((GET_CODE (sym) == CONST)                                  \
> -            && SYMBOL_REF_P (XEXP (XEXP (sym, 0),0))                   \
> -            && SYMBOL_REF_LOCAL_P (XEXP (XEXP (sym, 0),0)))))          \
> -     || riscv_cmodel == CM_MEDANY))
> +   ((flag_pic && LOCAL_SYM(sym)) || riscv_cmodel == CM_MEDANY))
>
>  /* Define this as 1 if `char' should by default be signed; else as 0.  */
>  #define DEFAULT_SIGNED_CHAR 0
> --
> 2.32.0
>

Re: [PATCH v3] RISC-V: remove deprecate pic code model macro

[Vineet Gupta]

On 9/2/22 14:05, Vineet Gupta wrote:
> Came across this deprecated symbol when looking around for
> -mexplicit-relocs handling in code
> 
> Signed-off-by: Vineet Gupta <vineetg@rivosinc.com>

No rush but looks like this got lost in the bigger thread about 
LOAD_ADDRESS_MACRO.

Thx,
-Vineet

> ---
>   gcc/config/riscv/riscv-c.cc               | 5 -----
>   gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-1.c | 3 ---
>   gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-2.c | 3 ---
>   gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-3.c | 3 ---
>   gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-4.c | 3 ---
>   gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-5.c | 3 ---
>   gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-6.c | 3 ---
>   gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-7.c | 3 ---
>   gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-8.c | 3 ---
>   9 files changed, 29 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-c.cc b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-c.cc
> index eb7ef09297e9..8d55ad598a9c 100644
> --- a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-c.cc
> +++ b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-c.cc
> @@ -93,11 +93,6 @@ riscv_cpu_cpp_builtins (cpp_reader *pfile)
>         break;
>   
>       case CM_PIC:
> -      /* __riscv_cmodel_pic is deprecated, and will removed in next GCC release.
> -	 see https://github.com/riscv/riscv-c-api-doc/pull/11  */
> -      builtin_define ("__riscv_cmodel_pic");
> -      /* FALLTHROUGH. */
> -
>       case CM_MEDANY:
>         builtin_define ("__riscv_cmodel_medany");
>         break;
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-1.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-1.c
> index 2e57ce6b3954..9dddc1849635 100644
> --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-1.c
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-1.c
> @@ -57,9 +57,6 @@ int main () {
>   #endif
>   #if defined(__riscv_cmodel_medany)
>   #error "__riscv_cmodel_medlow"
> -#endif
> -#if defined(__riscv_cmodel_pic)
> -#error "__riscv_cmodel_medlow"
>   #endif
>   
>     return 0;
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-2.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-2.c
> index c85b3c9fd32a..755fe4ef7d8a 100644
> --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-2.c
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-2.c
> @@ -57,9 +57,6 @@ int main () {
>   #endif
>   #if !defined(__riscv_cmodel_medany)
>   #error "__riscv_cmodel_medlow"
> -#endif
> -#if defined(__riscv_cmodel_pic)
> -#error "__riscv_cmodel_medlow"
>   #endif
>   
>     return 0;
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-3.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-3.c
> index 82a89d415809..513645351c09 100644
> --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-3.c
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-3.c
> @@ -57,9 +57,6 @@ int main () {
>   #endif
>   #if !defined(__riscv_cmodel_medany)
>   #error "__riscv_cmodel_medany"
> -#endif
> -#if !defined(__riscv_cmodel_pic)
> -#error "__riscv_cmodel_pic"
>   #endif
>   
>     return 0;
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-4.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-4.c
> index 5868d39eb67a..76b6feec6b6f 100644
> --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-4.c
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-4.c
> @@ -57,9 +57,6 @@ int main () {
>   #endif
>   #if defined(__riscv_cmodel_medany)
>   #error "__riscv_cmodel_medlow"
> -#endif
> -#if defined(__riscv_cmodel_pic)
> -#error "__riscv_cmodel_medlow"
>   #endif
>   
>     return 0;
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-5.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-5.c
> index 4b2bd3835061..54a51508afbd 100644
> --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-5.c
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-5.c
> @@ -57,9 +57,6 @@ int main () {
>   #endif
>   #if !defined(__riscv_cmodel_medany)
>   #error "__riscv_cmodel_medlow"
> -#endif
> -#if defined(__riscv_cmodel_pic)
> -#error "__riscv_cmodel_medlow"
>   #endif
>   
>     return 0;
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-6.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-6.c
> index 8e5ea366bd5e..f61709f7bf32 100644
> --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-6.c
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-6.c
> @@ -57,9 +57,6 @@ int main () {
>   #endif
>   #if !defined(__riscv_cmodel_medany)
>   #error "__riscv_cmodel_medany"
> -#endif
> -#if !defined(__riscv_cmodel_pic)
> -#error "__riscv_cmodel_medpic"
>   #endif
>   
>     return 0;
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-7.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-7.c
> index 0bde299aef1a..41217554c4db 100644
> --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-7.c
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-7.c
> @@ -57,9 +57,6 @@ int main () {
>   #endif
>   #if defined(__riscv_cmodel_medany)
>   #error "__riscv_cmodel_medlow"
> -#endif
> -#if defined(__riscv_cmodel_pic)
> -#error "__riscv_cmodel_medlow"
>   #endif
>   
>     return 0;
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-8.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-8.c
> index 18aa591a6039..982056a53438 100644
> --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-8.c
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-8.c
> @@ -57,9 +57,6 @@ int main () {
>   #endif
>   #if !defined(__riscv_cmodel_medany)
>   #error "__riscv_cmodel_medlow"
> -#endif
> -#if defined(__riscv_cmodel_pic)
> -#error "__riscv_cmodel_medlow"
>   #endif
>   
>     return 0;

Re: [PATCH v3] RISC-V: remove deprecate pic code model macro

[Kito Cheng]

Committed, and added ChangeLog, remember to add that next time :)

On Sat, Sep 24, 2022 at 2:08 AM Vineet Gupta <vineetg@rivosinc.com> wrote:
>
> On 9/2/22 14:05, Vineet Gupta wrote:
> > Came across this deprecated symbol when looking around for
> > -mexplicit-relocs handling in code
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Vineet Gupta <vineetg@rivosinc.com>
>
> No rush but looks like this got lost in the bigger thread about
> LOAD_ADDRESS_MACRO.
>
> Thx,
> -Vineet
>
> > ---
> >   gcc/config/riscv/riscv-c.cc               | 5 -----
> >   gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-1.c | 3 ---
> >   gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-2.c | 3 ---
> >   gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-3.c | 3 ---
> >   gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-4.c | 3 ---
> >   gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-5.c | 3 ---
> >   gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-6.c | 3 ---
> >   gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-7.c | 3 ---
> >   gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-8.c | 3 ---
> >   9 files changed, 29 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-c.cc b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-c.cc
> > index eb7ef09297e9..8d55ad598a9c 100644
> > --- a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-c.cc
> > +++ b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-c.cc
> > @@ -93,11 +93,6 @@ riscv_cpu_cpp_builtins (cpp_reader *pfile)
> >         break;
> >
> >       case CM_PIC:
> > -      /* __riscv_cmodel_pic is deprecated, and will removed in next GCC release.
> > -      see https://github.com/riscv/riscv-c-api-doc/pull/11  */
> > -      builtin_define ("__riscv_cmodel_pic");
> > -      /* FALLTHROUGH. */
> > -
> >       case CM_MEDANY:
> >         builtin_define ("__riscv_cmodel_medany");
> >         break;
> > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-1.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-1.c
> > index 2e57ce6b3954..9dddc1849635 100644
> > --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-1.c
> > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-1.c
> > @@ -57,9 +57,6 @@ int main () {
> >   #endif
> >   #if defined(__riscv_cmodel_medany)
> >   #error "__riscv_cmodel_medlow"
> > -#endif
> > -#if defined(__riscv_cmodel_pic)
> > -#error "__riscv_cmodel_medlow"
> >   #endif
> >
> >     return 0;
> > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-2.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-2.c
> > index c85b3c9fd32a..755fe4ef7d8a 100644
> > --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-2.c
> > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-2.c
> > @@ -57,9 +57,6 @@ int main () {
> >   #endif
> >   #if !defined(__riscv_cmodel_medany)
> >   #error "__riscv_cmodel_medlow"
> > -#endif
> > -#if defined(__riscv_cmodel_pic)
> > -#error "__riscv_cmodel_medlow"
> >   #endif
> >
> >     return 0;
> > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-3.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-3.c
> > index 82a89d415809..513645351c09 100644
> > --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-3.c
> > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-3.c
> > @@ -57,9 +57,6 @@ int main () {
> >   #endif
> >   #if !defined(__riscv_cmodel_medany)
> >   #error "__riscv_cmodel_medany"
> > -#endif
> > -#if !defined(__riscv_cmodel_pic)
> > -#error "__riscv_cmodel_pic"
> >   #endif
> >
> >     return 0;
> > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-4.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-4.c
> > index 5868d39eb67a..76b6feec6b6f 100644
> > --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-4.c
> > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-4.c
> > @@ -57,9 +57,6 @@ int main () {
> >   #endif
> >   #if defined(__riscv_cmodel_medany)
> >   #error "__riscv_cmodel_medlow"
> > -#endif
> > -#if defined(__riscv_cmodel_pic)
> > -#error "__riscv_cmodel_medlow"
> >   #endif
> >
> >     return 0;
> > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-5.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-5.c
> > index 4b2bd3835061..54a51508afbd 100644
> > --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-5.c
> > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-5.c
> > @@ -57,9 +57,6 @@ int main () {
> >   #endif
> >   #if !defined(__riscv_cmodel_medany)
> >   #error "__riscv_cmodel_medlow"
> > -#endif
> > -#if defined(__riscv_cmodel_pic)
> > -#error "__riscv_cmodel_medlow"
> >   #endif
> >
> >     return 0;
> > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-6.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-6.c
> > index 8e5ea366bd5e..f61709f7bf32 100644
> > --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-6.c
> > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-6.c
> > @@ -57,9 +57,6 @@ int main () {
> >   #endif
> >   #if !defined(__riscv_cmodel_medany)
> >   #error "__riscv_cmodel_medany"
> > -#endif
> > -#if !defined(__riscv_cmodel_pic)
> > -#error "__riscv_cmodel_medpic"
> >   #endif
> >
> >     return 0;
> > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-7.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-7.c
> > index 0bde299aef1a..41217554c4db 100644
> > --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-7.c
> > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-7.c
> > @@ -57,9 +57,6 @@ int main () {
> >   #endif
> >   #if defined(__riscv_cmodel_medany)
> >   #error "__riscv_cmodel_medlow"
> > -#endif
> > -#if defined(__riscv_cmodel_pic)
> > -#error "__riscv_cmodel_medlow"
> >   #endif
> >
> >     return 0;
> > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-8.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-8.c
> > index 18aa591a6039..982056a53438 100644
> > --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-8.c
> > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/predef-8.c
> > @@ -57,9 +57,6 @@ int main () {
> >   #endif
> >   #if !defined(__riscv_cmodel_medany)
> >   #error "__riscv_cmodel_medlow"
> > -#endif
> > -#if defined(__riscv_cmodel_pic)
> > -#error "__riscv_cmodel_medlow"
> >   #endif
> >
> >     return 0;
>

Re: [PATCH v3] RISC-V: remove deprecate pic code model macro

[Vineet Gupta]

On 10/4/22 19:24, Kito Cheng wrote:
> Committed, and added ChangeLog, remember to add that next time:)

Oops sorry, I will.

Thx,
-Vineet