Hi Christophe,
On 25/05/18 09:03, Christophe Lyon wrote:
Support additional relocations: TLS_GD32_FDPIC, TLS_LDM32_FDPIC, and
TLS_IE32_FDPIC.
We do not support the GNU2 TLS dialect.
2018-XX-XX Christophe Lyon <christophe.l...@st.com>
Mickaël Guêné <mickael.gu...@st.com>
gcc/
* config/arm/arm.c (tls_reloc): Add TLS_GD32_FDPIC,
TLS_LDM32_FDPIC and TLS_IE32_FDPIC.
(arm_call_tls_get_addr_fdpic): New.
(legitimize_tls_address_fdpic): New.
(legitimize_tls_address_not_fdpic): New.
(legitimize_tls_address): Add FDPIC support.
(arm_emit_tls_decoration): Likewise.
Change-Id: I4ea5034ff654540c4658d0a79fb92f70550cdf4a
diff --git a/gcc/config/arm/arm.c b/gcc/config/arm/arm.c
index 2434602..20b8f66 100644
--- a/gcc/config/arm/arm.c
+++ b/gcc/config/arm/arm.c
@@ -2373,9 +2373,12 @@ char arm_arch_name[] = "__ARM_ARCH_PROFILE__";
enum tls_reloc {
TLS_GD32,
+ TLS_GD32_FDPIC,
TLS_LDM32,
+ TLS_LDM32_FDPIC,
TLS_LDO32,
TLS_IE32,
+ TLS_IE32_FDPIC,
TLS_LE32,
TLS_DESCSEQ /* GNU scheme */
};
@@ -8681,6 +8684,30 @@ load_tls_operand (rtx x, rtx reg)
}
static rtx_insn *
+arm_call_tls_get_addr_fdpic (rtx x, rtx reg, rtx *valuep, int reloc)
+{
Please add a function comment
+ rtx sum;
+
+ gcc_assert (reloc != TLS_DESCSEQ);
+ start_sequence ();
+
+ sum = gen_rtx_UNSPEC (Pmode,
+ gen_rtvec (2, x, GEN_INT (reloc)),
+ UNSPEC_TLS);
+ reg = load_tls_operand (sum, reg);
+ emit_insn (gen_addsi3 (reg, reg, gen_rtx_REG (Pmode, 9)));
+
+ *valuep = emit_library_call_value (get_tls_get_addr (), NULL_RTX,
+ LCT_PURE, /* LCT_CONST? */
+ Pmode, reg, Pmode);
I prefer to avoid comments with such question marks. Is there some ambiguity
on which should be used?
+
+ rtx_insn *insns = get_insns ();
+ end_sequence ();
+
+ return insns;
+}
+
+static rtx_insn *
arm_call_tls_get_addr (rtx x, rtx reg, rtx *valuep, int reloc)
{
rtx label, labelno, sum;
@@ -8736,8 +8763,84 @@ arm_tls_descseq_addr (rtx x, rtx reg)
return reg;
}
-rtx
-legitimize_tls_address (rtx x, rtx reg)
+static rtx
+legitimize_tls_address_fdpic (rtx x, rtx reg)
+{
Please add a function comment, even if it's just a simple one.
+ rtx dest, ret, eqv, addend, sum, tp;
+ rtx_insn *insns;
+ unsigned int model = SYMBOL_REF_TLS_MODEL (x);
+
+ switch (model)
+ {
+ case TLS_MODEL_GLOBAL_DYNAMIC:
+ if (TARGET_GNU2_TLS)
+ {
+ abort ();
+ }
Use gcc_unreachable ().
+ else
+ {
+ /* Original scheme. */
+ insns = arm_call_tls_get_addr_fdpic (x, reg, &ret, TLS_GD32_FDPIC);
+ dest = gen_reg_rtx (Pmode);
+ emit_libcall_block (insns, dest, ret, x);
+ }
+ return dest;
+ break;
+
+ case TLS_MODEL_LOCAL_DYNAMIC:
+ if (TARGET_GNU2_TLS)
+ {
+ abort ();
+ }
Likewise.
+ else
+ {
+ insns = arm_call_tls_get_addr_fdpic (x, reg, &ret, TLS_LDM32_FDPIC);
+ /* Attach a unique REG_EQUIV, to allow the RTL optimizers to
+ share the LDM result with other LD model accesses. */
+ eqv = gen_rtx_UNSPEC (Pmode, gen_rtvec (1, const1_rtx),
+ UNSPEC_TLS);
+ dest = gen_reg_rtx (Pmode);
+ emit_libcall_block (insns, dest, ret, eqv);
+
+ /* Load the addend. */
+ addend = gen_rtx_UNSPEC (Pmode,
+ gen_rtvec (2, x, GEN_INT (TLS_LDO32)),
+ UNSPEC_TLS);
+ addend = force_reg (SImode, gen_rtx_CONST (SImode, addend));
Nit I'm guessing, but I think this SImode should be Pmode.
+ dest = gen_rtx_PLUS (Pmode, dest, addend);
+ }
+ return dest;
+ break;
+
+ case TLS_MODEL_INITIAL_EXEC:
+ sum = gen_rtx_UNSPEC (Pmode,
+ gen_rtvec (2, x, GEN_INT (TLS_IE32_FDPIC)),
+ UNSPEC_TLS);
+ reg = load_tls_operand (sum, reg);
+ /* FIXME: optimize below? */
Not a fan of such FIXMEs. Let's either optimise it now or leave the comment out.
+ emit_insn (gen_addsi3 (reg, reg, gen_rtx_REG (Pmode, 9)));
+ emit_insn (gen_movsi (reg, gen_rtx_MEM (Pmode, reg)));
You can use the shorter emit_move_insn (). I think there are other places in
the series
where you can do that as well.
+ tp = arm_load_tp (NULL_RTX);
+
+ return gen_rtx_PLUS (Pmode, tp, reg);
+ break;
+
+ case TLS_MODEL_LOCAL_EXEC:
+ tp = arm_load_tp (NULL_RTX);
+ reg = gen_rtx_UNSPEC (Pmode,
+ gen_rtvec (2, x, GEN_INT (TLS_LE32)),
+ UNSPEC_TLS);
+ reg = force_reg (SImode, gen_rtx_CONST (SImode, reg));
+
+ return gen_rtx_PLUS (Pmode, tp, reg);
+
+ default:
+ abort ();
+ }
+}
+
+static rtx
+legitimize_tls_address_not_fdpic (rtx x, rtx reg)
{
Likewise, function comment please.
rtx dest, tp, label, labelno, sum, ret, eqv, addend;
rtx_insn *insns;
@@ -8831,6 +8934,15 @@ legitimize_tls_address (rtx x, rtx reg)
}
}
+rtx
+legitimize_tls_address (rtx x, rtx reg)
+{
And here.
+ if (TARGET_FDPIC)
+ return legitimize_tls_address_fdpic (x, reg);
+ else
+ return legitimize_tls_address_not_fdpic (x, reg);
+}
And this is my main gripe.
The new fdpic-specific function looks like it could be integrated with the
existing legitimize_tls_address
function. The structure is the same (switch on model construct and emit some
RTXes).
Can you look to merge the fdpic code more organically rather than splitting
them off?
Thanks,
Kyrill
+
/* Try machine-dependent ways of modifying an illegitimate address
to be legitimate. If we find one, return the new, valid address. */
rtx
@@ -28022,15 +28134,24 @@ arm_emit_tls_decoration (FILE *fp, rtx x)
case TLS_GD32:
fputs ("(tlsgd)", fp);
break;
+ case TLS_GD32_FDPIC:
+ fputs ("(tlsgd_fdpic)", fp);
+ break;
case TLS_LDM32:
fputs ("(tlsldm)", fp);
break;
+ case TLS_LDM32_FDPIC:
+ fputs ("(tlsldm_fdpic)", fp);
+ break;
case TLS_LDO32:
fputs ("(tlsldo)", fp);
break;
case TLS_IE32:
fputs ("(gottpoff)", fp);
break;
+ case TLS_IE32_FDPIC:
+ fputs ("(gottpoff_fdpic)", fp);
+ break;
case TLS_LE32:
fputs ("(tpoff)", fp);
break;
--
2.6.3
