From: Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@gmail.com>
To: Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com>
Cc: Jeff Law <law@redhat.com>, Vladimir Makarov <vmakarov@redhat.com>,
gcc@gnu.org, gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>,
Evgeny Stupachenko <evstupac@gmail.com>,
Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Enable EBX for x86 in 32bits PIC code
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2014 16:25:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAFULd4asPi8Qw0vUiKO6C0yFwNSXpsLRJKMNyHwaAHuHUE23PA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMbmDYaqS1VLx+3MWgSXErKT7edqWkObWh+GWOxfb1U8E473Wg@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 3:29 PM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich.gnu@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/calls.c b/gcc/calls.c
>>>>>>> index 4285ec1..85dae6b 100644
>>>>>>> --- a/gcc/calls.c
>>>>>>> +++ b/gcc/calls.c
>>>>>>> @@ -1122,6 +1122,14 @@ initialize_argument_information (int num_actuals
>>>>>>> ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED,
>>>>>>> call_expr_arg_iterator iter;
>>>>>>> tree arg;
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> + if (targetm.calls.implicit_pic_arg (fndecl ? fndecl : fntype))
>>>>>>> + {
>>>>>>> + gcc_assert (pic_offset_table_rtx);
>>>>>>> + args[j].tree_value = make_tree (ptr_type_node,
>>>>>>> + pic_offset_table_rtx);
>>>>>>> + j--;
>>>>>>> + }
>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>> if (struct_value_addr_value)
>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>> args[j].tree_value = struct_value_addr_value;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So why do you need this? Can't this be handled in the call/call_value
>>>>>> expanders or what about attaching the use to CALL_INSN_FUNCTION_USAGE from
>>>>>> inside ix86_expand_call? Basically I'm not seeing the need for another
>>>>>> target hook here. I think that would significantly simply the patch as
>>>>>> well.
>>>>>
>>>>> GOT base address become an additional implicit arg with EBX relaxed
>>>>> and I handled it as all other args. I can move EBX initialization into
>>>>> ix86_expand_call. Would still need some hint from target to init
>>>>> pic_offset_table_rtx with proper value in the beginning of function
>>>>> expand.
>>>>
>>>> Maybe you can you use get_hard_reg_initial_val for this?
>>>
>>> Actually there is no input hard reg holding GOT address. Currently I
>>> use initialization with ebx with following ebx initialization in
>>> prolog_epilog pass. But this is a temporary workaround. It is
>>> inefficient because always uses callee save reg to get GOT address. I
>>> suppose we should generate pseudo reg for pic_offset_table_rtx and
>>> also set_got with this register as a destination in expand pass.
>>> After register allocation set_got may be transformed into get_pc_thunk
>>> call with proper hard reg. But some target hook has to be used for
>>> this.
>>
>> Let me expand my idea a bit. IIRC, get_hard_reg_initial_val and
>> friends will automatically emit intialization of a pseudo from
>> pic_offset_table_rtx hard reg. After reload, real initialization of
>> pic_offset_table_rtx hard reg is emitted in pro_and_epilogue pass. I
>> don't know if this works with current implementation of dynamic
>> pic_offset_table_rtx selection, though.
>
> That means you should choose some hard reg early before register
> allocation to be used for PIC reg initialization. I do not like we
> have to do this and want to just generate set_got with pseudo reg and
> do not involve any additional hard reg. That would look like
>
> (insn/f 168 167 169 2 (parallel [
> (set (reg:SI 127)
> (unspec:SI [
> (const_int 0 [0])
> ] UNSPEC_SET_GOT))
> (clobber (reg:CC 17 flags))
> ]) test.cc:42 -1
> (expr_list:REG_CFA_FLUSH_QUEUE (nil)
> (nil)))
>
> after expand pass. r127 is pic_offset_table_rtx here. And after
> reload it would become:
>
> (insn/f 168 167 169 2 (parallel [
> (set (reg:SI 3 bx)
> (unspec:SI [
> (const_int 0 [0])
> ] UNSPEC_SET_GOT))
> (clobber (reg:CC 17 flags))
> ]) test.cc:42 -1
> (expr_list:REG_CFA_FLUSH_QUEUE (nil)
> (nil)))
>
> And no additional actions are required on pro_and_epilogue. Also it
> simplifies analysis whether we should generate set_got at all.
> Current we check hard reg is ever live which is wrong with not fixed
> ebx because any usage of hard reg used to init GOT doesn't mean GOT
> usage. And with my proposed scheme unused GOT would mean DCE just
> removes useless set_got.
Yes this is better. I was under impression you want to retain current
initialization insertion in expand_prologue.
Uros.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-08-28 16:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 49+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <CAOvf_xxsQ_oYGqNAVQ1+BW+CuD3mzebZ2xma0jpF=WfyZMCRCA@mail.gmail.com>
[not found] ` <CAFiYyc1mFtTezkTJORmJJq+yht=qPSwiN7KDn19+bSuSdaqvMQ@mail.gmail.com>
[not found] ` <CAOvf_xyeVeg2oB9Xxz8RMEQ6gyfJY5whd9s4ygoAAEaMU9efnA@mail.gmail.com>
[not found] ` <20140707114750.GB31640@tucnak.redhat.com>
[not found] ` <CAMbmDYZV_fx0jxmKHhLsC2pJ7pDzuu6toEAH72izOdpq6KGyfg@mail.gmail.com>
2014-08-22 12:21 ` Ilya Enkovich
2014-08-23 1:47 ` Hans-Peter Nilsson
2014-08-25 9:25 ` Ilya Enkovich
2014-08-25 11:24 ` Hans-Peter Nilsson
2014-08-25 11:43 ` Ilya Enkovich
2014-08-25 15:09 ` Vladimir Makarov
2014-08-26 7:49 ` Ilya Enkovich
2014-08-26 8:57 ` Ilya Enkovich
2014-08-26 15:25 ` Vladimir Makarov
2014-08-26 21:42 ` Ilya Enkovich
2014-08-27 20:19 ` Vladimir Makarov
2014-08-28 8:28 ` Ilya Enkovich
2014-08-29 6:47 ` Ilya Enkovich
2014-09-02 14:29 ` Vladimir Makarov
2014-09-03 20:19 ` Vladimir Makarov
[not found] ` <0EFAB2BDD0F67E4FB6CCC8B9F87D756969B3A89D@IRSMSX101.ger.corp.intel.com>
2014-09-09 16:43 ` Vladimir Makarov
2014-09-11 19:57 ` Jeff Law
2014-09-23 13:54 ` Ilya Enkovich
2014-09-23 14:23 ` Uros Bizjak
2014-09-23 15:59 ` Jeff Law
2014-09-23 14:34 ` Jakub Jelinek
2014-09-23 15:59 ` Petr Machata
2014-09-23 16:00 ` Jeff Law
2014-09-23 16:03 ` Jakub Jelinek
2014-09-23 16:10 ` Jeff Law
2014-09-24 6:56 ` Ilya Enkovich
2014-09-24 15:27 ` Jeff Law
2014-09-24 20:32 ` Ilya Enkovich
2014-09-24 21:20 ` Jeff Law
2014-09-29 11:09 ` Jakub Jelinek
2014-10-21 16:05 ` [PATCH] Improve i?86 address delegitimization after 32-bit pic changes (PR target/63542) Jakub Jelinek
2014-10-22 2:02 ` Jeff Law
2014-11-24 15:57 ` H.J. Lu
2014-08-27 21:39 ` Enable EBX for x86 in 32bits PIC code Jeff Law
2014-08-28 8:37 ` Ilya Enkovich
2014-08-28 12:43 ` Uros Bizjak
2014-08-28 12:54 ` Ilya Enkovich
2014-08-28 13:08 ` Uros Bizjak
2014-08-28 13:29 ` Ilya Enkovich
2014-08-28 16:25 ` Uros Bizjak [this message]
2014-08-29 18:56 ` Jeff Law
2014-08-25 17:30 ` Jeff Law
2014-08-28 13:01 ` Uros Bizjak
2014-08-28 13:13 ` Ilya Enkovich
2014-08-28 18:30 ` Florian Weimer
2014-08-29 18:48 ` Jeff Law
2014-08-28 18:58 ` Uros Bizjak
2014-08-29 6:51 ` Ilya Enkovich
2014-08-29 18:45 ` Jeff Law
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=CAFULd4asPi8Qw0vUiKO6C0yFwNSXpsLRJKMNyHwaAHuHUE23PA@mail.gmail.com \
--to=ubizjak@gmail.com \
--cc=enkovich.gnu@gmail.com \
--cc=evstupac@gmail.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=gcc@gnu.org \
--cc=law@redhat.com \
--cc=richard.guenther@gmail.com \
--cc=vmakarov@redhat.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).