https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89290
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #3)
> This address should be valid:
>
> (const:DI (plus:DI (unspec:DI [
> (symbol_ref:DI ("s") [flags 0x2a] <var_decl 0x7f1b48c08b40
> s>)
> ] UNSPEC_NTPOFF)
> (const_int 8 [0x8])))
>
> and there is code that allows this form in ix86_legitimate_address_p:
>
> /* foo@dtpoff(%rX) is ok. */
> if (GET_CODE (disp) != CONST
> || GET_CODE (XEXP (disp, 0)) != PLUS
> || GET_CODE (XEXP (XEXP (disp, 0), 0)) != UNSPEC
> || !CONST_INT_P (XEXP (XEXP (disp, 0), 1))
> || (XINT (XEXP (XEXP (disp, 0), 0), 1) != UNSPEC_DTPOFF
> && XINT (XEXP (XEXP (disp, 0), 0), 1) != UNSPEC_NTPOFF))
> /* Non-constant pic memory reference. */
> return false;
>
> Jakub, can you maybe look into this issue?
I will, probably by looking at why it works fine without -mcmodel=large,
because in that case it generates those CONSTs with PLUS, UNSPEC_NTPOFF and
CONST_INT offset.
