From: David Edelsohn <dje.gcc@gmail.com>
To: Jan Hubicka <hubicka@ucw.cz>,
GCC Patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>,
Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com>,
ramrad01@arm.com, Richard Sandiford <rdsandiford@googlemail.com>
Subject: Re: ipa-visibility TLC 2/n
Date: Tue, 03 Jun 2014 13:53:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAGWvnynaa+45yYkyrkkKiEL+j9eEchTtBTbWe=r6K7Gw42XXTg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAGWvny=uXmpFepw4pQSqwyL3Qdj1Zf0=ghOeaUGgV1MxWubxuw@mail.gmail.com>
Honza,
How can we make further progress with the large regression on AIX?
Thanks, David
On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 1:24 PM, David Edelsohn <dje.gcc@gmail.com> wrote:
> Honza,
>
> For example g++.dg/abi/vcall1.C fails at a call in a "localalias"
> function, which jumps to a bad location:
>
>
> (gdb) up
> #1 0x100004c0 in B::B() [clone .localalias.2] ()
> (gdb) x/16i $pc-32
> 0x100004a0 <_ZN1BC2Ev+156>: add r10,r10,r8
> 0x100004a4 <_ZN1BC2Ev+160>: mr r3,r10
> 0x100004a8 <_ZN1BC2Ev+164>: stw r2,20(r1)
> 0x100004ac <_ZN1BC2Ev+168>: lwz r10,0(r9)
> 0x100004b0 <_ZN1BC2Ev+172>: lwz r11,8(r9)
> 0x100004b4 <_ZN1BC2Ev+176>: mtctr r10
> 0x100004b8 <_ZN1BC2Ev.localalias.2+180>: lwz r2,4(r9)
> 0x100004bc <_ZN1BC2Ev.localalias.2+184>: bctrl
> => 0x100004c0 <_ZN1BC2Ev.localalias.2+188>: lwz r2,20(r1)
> 0x100004c4 <_ZN1BC2Ev.localalias.2+192>: addi r1,r31,64
> 0x100004c8 <_ZN1BC2Ev.localalias.2+196>: lwz r0,8(r1)
> 0x100004cc <_ZN1BC2Ev.localalias.2+200>: mtlr r0
> 0x100004d0 <_ZN1BC2Ev.localalias.2+204>: lwz r31,-4(r1)
> 0x100004d4 <_ZN1BC2Ev.localalias.2+208>: blr
>
>
>
> On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 3:20 AM, Richard Sandiford
> <rdsandiford@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> Jan Hubicka <hubicka@ucw.cz> writes:
>>>> Jan Hubicka <hubicka@ucw.cz> writes:
>>>> >> Richard Sandiford wrote the original section anchors implementation,
>>>> >> so he would be a good person to comment about the interaction between
>>>> >> aliases and section anchors.
>>>> >
>>>> > Thanks! Richard, does this patch seem sane?
>>>>
>>>> Looks good to me in principle, but with:
>>>>
>>>> > + struct symtab_node *snode;
>>>> > decl = SYMBOL_REF_DECL (symbol);
>>>> > +
>>>> > + snode = symtab_node (decl);
>>>> > + if (snode->alias)
>>>> > + {
>>>> > + rtx target = DECL_RTL (symtab_alias_ultimate_target
>>>> > (snode)->decl);
>>>> > + SYMBOL_REF_BLOCK_OFFSET (symbol) = SYMBOL_REF_BLOCK_OFFSET
>>>> > (target);
>>>> > + return;
>>>> > + }
>>>>
>>>> is SYMBOL_REF_BLOCK_OFFSET (target) guaranteed to be valid at this point?
>>>> It looked at face value like you'd need a recursive call to place_block_symbol
>>>> on the target before the copy.
>>>
>>> My reading was that SYMBOL_REF_BLOCK_OFFSET is computed at DECL_RTL
>>> calculation time. But you are right - it is done by validize_mem that
>>> is not done by DECL_RTL. Shall I just call it on target first?
>>
>> Yeah, sounds like calling place_block_symbol would be safer.
>>
>> IIRC, the reason I didn't do it at SET_DECL_RTL time is that some frontends
>> tended to create placeholder decls that for whatever reason ended up with
>> an initial DECL_RTL, then changed the properties of the decl later once
>> more information was known. (This was all many years ago.)
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Richard
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-06-03 13:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-05-28 21:44 David Edelsohn
2014-05-28 22:31 ` Jan Hubicka
2014-05-28 22:44 ` David Edelsohn
2014-05-28 23:17 ` Jan Hubicka
2014-05-29 8:08 ` Richard Sandiford
2014-05-29 17:12 ` Jan Hubicka
2014-05-30 7:20 ` Richard Sandiford
2014-05-30 15:50 ` David Edelsohn
2014-06-08 16:44 ` Jan Hubicka
2014-06-10 8:51 ` Richard Biener
2014-06-08 16:49 ` Jan Hubicka
2014-06-08 16:54 ` Jan Hubicka
2014-06-08 16:58 ` Jan Hubicka
2014-06-10 13:08 ` David Edelsohn
2014-06-10 18:02 ` Jan Hubicka
2014-06-10 22:23 ` David Edelsohn
2014-06-10 22:55 ` Jan Hubicka
2014-06-11 14:26 ` Rainer Orth
2014-06-11 17:02 ` Jan Hubicka
2014-06-12 10:43 ` Rainer Orth
2014-06-12 13:33 ` Rainer Orth
2014-06-13 3:22 ` Jan Hubicka
2014-06-11 8:17 ` Jan Hubicka
2014-05-30 17:24 ` David Edelsohn
2014-05-30 21:02 ` Jan Hubicka
2014-05-31 0:57 ` David Edelsohn
2014-05-31 7:42 ` Richard Sandiford
2014-05-31 14:43 ` David Edelsohn
2014-06-03 13:53 ` David Edelsohn [this message]
2014-06-06 7:10 ` Jan Hubicka
2014-06-06 15:53 ` David Edelsohn
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2014-05-25 5:54 Jan Hubicka
2014-05-25 20:45 ` Ramana Radhakrishnan
2014-05-25 22:23 ` Jan Hubicka
2014-05-26 1:04 ` Jan Hubicka
2014-05-26 5:29 ` Ramana Radhakrishnan
2014-05-27 20:06 ` Jan Hubicka
2014-05-27 22:20 ` Jan Hubicka
2014-05-28 17:39 ` Yufeng Zhang
2014-05-28 19:52 ` Jan Hubicka
2014-05-28 21:56 ` Jan Hubicka
2014-05-29 14:17 ` Yufeng Zhang
2014-05-30 16:18 ` Ramana Radhakrishnan
2014-05-26 15:39 ` Martin Liška
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='CAGWvnynaa+45yYkyrkkKiEL+j9eEchTtBTbWe=r6K7Gw42XXTg@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=dje.gcc@gmail.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=hubicka@ucw.cz \
--cc=ramrad01@arm.com \
--cc=rdsandiford@googlemail.com \
--cc=rth@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).