public inbox for gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sriraman Tallam <tmsriram@google.com>
To: "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>
Cc: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>, Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@gmail.com>,
		"gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org" <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>,
	David Li <davidxl@google.com>,
		Cary Coutant <ccoutant@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH x86_64] Optimize access to globals in "-fpie -pie" builds with copy relocations
Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2015 21:36:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAAs8Hmw=Z9VeLz+MAY0X-POfkwXLFEsRFy8wEPDdyzVPV8ee=g@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMe9rOrLwHdtsH2z_7dBpVKiJRtfT7iHaHO7wQ23o25TL7cTMw@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 1:29 PM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 1:20 PM, Sriraman Tallam <tmsriram@google.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 11:36 AM, Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Feb 03, 2015 at 11:25:38AM -0800, Sriraman Tallam wrote:
>>>> This was the original patch to i386.c to let global accesses take
>>>> advantage of copy relocations and avoid the GOT.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> @@ -13113,7 +13113,11 @@ legitimate_pic_address_disp_p (rtx disp)
>>>>   return true;
>>>>      }
>>>>    else if (!SYMBOL_REF_FAR_ADDR_P (op0)
>>>> -   && SYMBOL_REF_LOCAL_P (op0)
>>>> +   && (SYMBOL_REF_LOCAL_P (op0)
>>>> +       || (HAVE_LD_PIE_COPYRELOC
>>>> +   && flag_pie
>>>> +   && !SYMBOL_REF_WEAK (op0)
>>>> +   && !SYMBOL_REF_FUNCTION_P (op0)))
>>>>     && ix86_cmodel != CM_LARGE_PIC)
>>>>
>>>> I do not understand here why weak global data access must go through
>>>> the GOT and not use copy relocations. Ultimately, there is only going
>>>> to be one copy of the global either defined in the executable or the
>>>> shared object right?
>>>>
>>>> Can we remove the check for SYMBOL_REF_WEAK?
>>>
>>> So, what will then happen if the weak undef symbol isn't defined anywhere?
>>> In non-PIE binaries that is fine, the linker will store 0.
>>> But in PIE binaries, the 0 would be biased by the PIE load bias and thus
>>> wouldn't be NULL.
>>
>> Thanks for clarifying.
>>
>>> You can only optimize weak vars if there is some weak definition in the
>>> current TU.
>>
>> Would this be fine then?  Replace !SYMBOL_REF_WEAK (op0) with
>>
>> !(SYMBOL_REF_WEAK (op0) && SYMBOL_REF_EXTERNAL_P (op0))
>>
>
> The full condition is:
>
>                   && (SYMBOL_REF_LOCAL_P (op0)
>                        || (HAVE_LD_PIE_COPYRELOC
>                            && flag_pie
>                            && !SYMBOL_REF_WEAK (op0)
>                            && !SYMBOL_REF_FUNCTION_P (op0)))
>
> If the weak op0 is defined in the current TU, shouldn't
> SYMBOL_REF_LOCAL_P (op0)  be true for PIE?

Thats not what I see for this:

zap.cc
---------
__attribute__((weak))
int glob;

int main()
{
   printf("%d\n", glob);
}

(gdb) p debug_rtx(op0)
(symbol_ref/i:DI ("glob") <var_decl 0x7ffff74f51c8 glob>)

(gdb) p SYMBOL_REF_LOCAL_P(op0)
$4 = false

(gdb) p SYMBOL_REF_WEAK (op0)
$5 = 1

(gdb) p SYMBOL_REF_EXTERNAL_P (op0)
$6 = false

Thanks
Sri




>
> --
> H.J.

  reply	other threads:[~2015-02-03 21:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 63+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-12-02 19:19 Uros Bizjak
2014-12-02 19:39 ` H.J. Lu
2014-12-02 19:40 ` H.J. Lu
2014-12-02 20:01   ` Uros Bizjak
2014-12-02 20:43     ` H.J. Lu
2014-12-02 20:19       ` Jakub Jelinek
2014-12-02 22:14         ` H.J. Lu
2014-12-02 23:21           ` H.J. Lu
2014-12-03 13:47     ` H.J. Lu
2014-12-03 15:01       ` H.J. Lu
2014-12-03 21:35         ` H.J. Lu
2014-12-04 12:44           ` Uros Bizjak
2014-12-04 16:46             ` H.J. Lu
2014-12-04 19:32               ` Uros Bizjak
2015-02-03 19:25               ` Sriraman Tallam
2015-02-03 19:26                 ` Sriraman Tallam
2015-02-03 19:36                 ` Jakub Jelinek
2015-02-03 21:20                   ` Sriraman Tallam
2015-02-03 21:29                     ` H.J. Lu
2015-02-03 21:36                       ` Sriraman Tallam [this message]
2015-02-03 22:03                         ` H.J. Lu
2015-02-03 22:19                           ` Jakub Jelinek
2015-02-04  1:16                             ` H.J. Lu
2015-02-04 18:27                               ` Sriraman Tallam
2015-02-04 18:31                                 ` Jakub Jelinek
2015-02-04 18:38                                   ` H.J. Lu
2015-02-04 18:42                                     ` Jakub Jelinek
2015-02-04 18:45                                       ` H.J. Lu
2015-02-04 18:51                                         ` Sriraman Tallam
2015-02-04 18:57                                           ` H.J. Lu
2015-02-04 21:53                                             ` Sriraman Tallam
2015-02-04 22:37                                               ` H.J. Lu
2015-02-04 22:47                                                 ` Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
2015-02-04 23:10                                                   ` H.J. Lu
2015-02-04 23:29                                                     ` H.J. Lu
2015-02-05 16:57                                                       ` Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
2015-02-05 18:54                                                       ` Richard Henderson
2015-02-05 19:01                                                         ` H.J. Lu
2015-02-05 19:59                                                           ` Richard Henderson
2015-02-05 22:05                                                             ` Sriraman Tallam
2015-02-05 22:47                                                               ` H.J. Lu
2015-02-05 22:48                                                                 ` Sriraman Tallam
2015-02-06 16:25                                                               ` H.J. Lu
2015-02-27 23:39               ` H.J. Lu
2015-02-27 23:46                 ` H.J. Lu
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2014-12-04 22:19 Dominique Dhumieres
2014-12-04 23:54 ` H.J. Lu
2014-05-15 18:34 Sriraman Tallam
2014-05-19 18:11 ` Sriraman Tallam
2014-06-09 22:55   ` Sriraman Tallam
2014-06-21  0:17     ` Sriraman Tallam
2014-06-26 17:55       ` Sriraman Tallam
2014-07-11 17:42         ` Sriraman Tallam
2014-09-02 18:15           ` Sriraman Tallam
2014-09-02 20:40       ` Richard Henderson
2014-09-03  7:25         ` Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
2014-09-08 22:19         ` Sriraman Tallam
2014-09-19 21:11           ` Sriraman Tallam
2014-09-29 17:57             ` Sriraman Tallam
2014-10-06 20:43               ` Sriraman Tallam
2014-11-10 23:35                 ` Sriraman Tallam
2014-12-02 18:01                   ` Sriraman Tallam
2014-12-02 19:06           ` H.J. Lu

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='CAAs8Hmw=Z9VeLz+MAY0X-POfkwXLFEsRFy8wEPDdyzVPV8ee=g@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=tmsriram@google.com \
    --cc=ccoutant@google.com \
    --cc=davidxl@google.com \
    --cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=hjl.tools@gmail.com \
    --cc=jakub@redhat.com \
    --cc=ubizjak@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).