From: "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>
To: Bernhard Reutner-Fischer <rep.dot.nop@gmail.com>
Cc: Sriraman Tallam <tmsriram@google.com>,
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: Wed, 04 Feb 2015 23:29:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAMe9rOpAnkfsJMXMM=MGNfqsCsLeBdNwmyCqLk6FbbrULbKigQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMe9rOqyFr_dUHCNccrYDPP8_Xq=4=TfLe-24_nLxigUQy0K1A@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1859 bytes --]
On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 3:10 PM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 2:47 PM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
> <rep.dot.nop@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On February 4, 2015 11:37:01 PM GMT+01:00, "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 1:53 PM, Sriraman Tallam <tmsriram@google.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 10:57 AM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 10:51 AM, Sriraman Tallam
>>><tmsriram@google.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 10:45 AM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 10:42 AM, Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 04, 2015 at 10:38:48AM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Common symbol should be resolved locally for PIE.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> binds_local_p yes, binds_to_current_def_p no.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Is SYMBOL_REF_LOCAL_P set to binds_local_p or
>>>>>>> binds_to_current_def_p?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Looks like binds_local_p:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> varasm.c:
>>>>>> void
>>>>>> default_encode_section_info (tree decl, rtx rtl, int first
>>>ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED)
>>>>>> {
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>> if (targetm.binds_local_p (decl))
>>>>>> flags |= SYMBOL_FLAG_LOCAL;
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Why is SYMBOL_REF_LOCAL_P false?
>>>>
>>>> In varasm.c, default_binds_local_p_1
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> /* Default visibility weak data can be overridden by a strong symbol
>>>> in another module and so are not local. */
>>>> else if (DECL_WEAK (exp)
>>>> && !resolved_locally)
>>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>>Why is resolved_locally false? It should be true for common
>>>symbol when compiling for PIE.
>>>
>>>> local_p = false;
>>>>
>>>> For weak definition, it is set to false here.
>>
>> Yea and i think this is still wrong and known as
>> http://gcc.gnu.org/PR32219
>>
>
I am testing this patch.
--
H.J.
[-- Attachment #2: pr32219.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 1605 bytes --]
diff --git a/gcc/varasm.c b/gcc/varasm.c
index eb65b1f..36fd393 100644
--- a/gcc/varasm.c
+++ b/gcc/varasm.c
@@ -6826,11 +6826,17 @@ default_binds_local_p_1 (const_tree exp, int shlib)
&& (TREE_STATIC (exp) || DECL_EXTERNAL (exp)))
{
varpool_node *vnode = varpool_node::get (exp);
- if (vnode && (resolution_local_p (vnode->resolution) || vnode->in_other_partition))
- resolved_locally = true;
- if (vnode
- && resolution_to_local_definition_p (vnode->resolution))
- resolved_to_local_def = true;
+ /* If not building shared library, common or initialized symbols
+ are also resolved locally, regardless they are weak or not. */
+ if (vnode)
+ {
+ if ((!shlib && vnode->definition)
+ || vnode->in_other_partition
+ || resolution_local_p (vnode->resolution))
+ resolved_locally = true;
+ if (resolution_to_local_definition_p (vnode->resolution))
+ resolved_to_local_def = true;
+ }
}
else if (TREE_CODE (exp) == FUNCTION_DECL && TREE_PUBLIC (exp))
{
@@ -6880,13 +6886,6 @@ default_binds_local_p_1 (const_tree exp, int shlib)
symbols resolved from other modules. */
else if (shlib)
local_p = false;
- /* Uninitialized COMMON variable may be unified with symbols
- resolved from other modules. */
- else if (DECL_COMMON (exp)
- && !resolved_locally
- && (DECL_INITIAL (exp) == NULL
- || (!in_lto_p && DECL_INITIAL (exp) == error_mark_node)))
- local_p = false;
/* Otherwise we're left with initialized (or non-common) global data
which is of necessity defined locally. */
else
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-02-04 23:29 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
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 [this message]
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='CAMe9rOpAnkfsJMXMM=MGNfqsCsLeBdNwmyCqLk6FbbrULbKigQ@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=hjl.tools@gmail.com \
--cc=ccoutant@google.com \
--cc=davidxl@google.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=jakub@redhat.com \
--cc=rep.dot.nop@gmail.com \
--cc=tmsriram@google.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).