On Tue, Jun 09, 2015 at 03:21:55PM +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote: > I'm afraid that simple scan loop won't work correctly on x32. There > are some issues with UNSPEC_TP for this target, so we have to generate > zero_extend of SImode UNSPEC, e.g.: > > (plus:DI (zero_extend:DI (unspec:SI [...] UNSPEC_TP) (reg:DI ...)) > > as can be seen in get_thread_pointer to construct the address. It > looks that your loop won't find the UNSPEC_TP tag in the above case.
You're right, for -m32 it would need to start with rtx *x = &addr; + while (GET_CODE (*x) == ZERO_EXTEND + || GET_CODE (*x) == AND + || GET_CODE (*x) == SUBREG) + x = &XEXP (*x, 0); to get at the PLUS. Now, with either the original patch with the above ammendment, or with the iterators, the question is what to do with the UNSPEC_TP for -m32. Is it ok to just use addr32 on the lea and use normal Pmode (== DImode) addressing for the memory reads (if I read the code well, that is what it does right now for the non-TLS ones: if (GET_MODE (base) != Pmode) base = gen_rtx_REG (Pmode, REGNO (base)); )? Then we'd need to change tls_base mode to Pmode. Jakub