On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 8:11 AM, H.J. Lu <hjl.to...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 7:50 AM, H.J. Lu <hjl.to...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 5:42 AM, Uros Bizjak <ubiz...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 2:00 PM, H.J. Lu <hjl.to...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 2:04 AM, Uros Bizjak <ubiz...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 12:29 AM, H.J. Lu <hongjiu...@intel.com> wrote: >>>>>> Since sibcall never returns, we can only use call-clobbered register >>>>>> as GOT base. Otherwise, callee-saved register used as GOT base won't >>>>>> be properly restored. >>>>>> >>>>>> Tested on x86-64 with -m32. OK for trunk? >>>>> >>>>> You don't have to add explicit clobber for members of "CLOBBERED_REGS" >>>>> class, and register_no_elim_operand predicate should be used with "U" >>>>> constraint. Also, please introduce new predicate, similar to how >>>>> GOT_memory_operand is defined and handled. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Here is the updated patch. There is a predicate already, >>>> sibcall_memory_operand. It allows any registers to >>>> be as GOT base, which is the root of our problem. >>>> This patch removes GOT slot from it and handles >>>> sibcall over GOT slot with *sibcall_GOT_32 and >>>> *sibcall_value_GOT_32 patterns. Since I need to >>>> expose constraints on GOT base register to RA, >>>> I have to use 2 operands, GOT base and function >>>> symbol, to describe sibcall over 32-bit GOT slot. >>> >>> Please use >>> >>> (mem:SI (plus:SI >>> (match_operand:SI 0 "register_no_elim_operand" "U") >>> (match_operand:SI 1 "GOT32_symbol_operand"))) >>> ... >>> >>> to avoid manual rebuild of the operand. >>> >> >> Is this OK? >> > > An updated patch to allow sibcall_memory_operand for RTL > expansion. OK for trunk if there is no regression? >
There is no regressions on x86-64 with -m32. OK for trunk? -- H.J.
