On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 01:42:35PM +0100, Jiong Wang wrote:
>
> Jiong Wang writes:
>
> > Alexander Monakov writes:
> >
> >>> Attachment is the patch which repair -fno-plt support for AArch64.
> >>>
> >>> aarch64_is_noplt_call_p will only be true if:
> >>>
> >>> * gcc is generating position independent code.
> >>> * function symbol has declaration.
> >>> * either -fno-plt or "(no_plt)" attribute specified.
> >>> * it's a external function.
> >>>
> >>> OK for trunk?
> >>>
> >>> 2015-07-16 Jiong Wang <jiong.w...@arm.com>
> >>>
> >>> gcc/
> >>> * config/aarch64/aarch64-protos.h (aarch64_is_noplt_call_p): New
> >>> declaration.
> >>> * config/aarch64/aarch64.c (aarch64_is_noplt_call_p): New function.
> >>> * config/aarch64/aarch64.md (call_value_symbol): Check noplt
> >>> scenarios.
> >>> (call_symbol): Ditto.
> >>
> >> Shouldn't the same treatment be applied to tailcall
> >> (sibcall_{,value_}symbol)
> >> patterns? I guess it could be done as a followup patch, but would be nice
> >> if
> >> that isn't forgotten.
> >
> > Thanks for the remaind, that will be done as a followup patch.
>
> Patch attached.
>
> Added one more restriction to "Usf" constraint which is used by sibcall
> pattern when matching direct call.
>
> given example like
>
> void
> cal_novalue (int a)
> {
> dec (a);
> }
>
> when -fpic -fno-plt specified we now generate:
>
> cal:
> adrp x1, :got:dec
> ldr x1, [x1, #:got_lo12:dec]
> br x1
>
> instead of:
>
> cal:
> b dec
OK.
Thanks,
James
> 2015-07-20 Jiong Wang <jiong.w...@arm.com>
>
> gcc/
> * config/aarch64/constraints.md (Usf): Add the test of
> aarch64_is_noplt_call_p.
>
> gcc/testsuite/
> * gcc.target/aarch64/noplt_3.c: New test.
