Ilya Leoshkevich wrote: > Am 30.10.2018 um 18:22 schrieb Ulrich Weigand <uweig...@de.ibm.com>: > > This definitely looks wrong. If we haven't annotated the address, > > it should *not* be found by find_constant_pool_ref, since we are > > not going to replace it! That was the whole point of not annotating > > it in the first place ... > > There are two use cases for find_constant_pool_ref (). One is indeed > replacing annotated references. The other (in s390_mainpool_start () > and s390_chunkify_start ()) is creating pool entries. So I've decided > to let it find unannotated references for the second use case.
OK, but if we access the constant via relative address, we don't need to copy it into the back-end managed pool either; the relative address can just refer the constant in the default pool maintained by the middle end. Bye, Ulrich -- Dr. Ulrich Weigand GNU/Linux compilers and toolchain ulrich.weig...@de.ibm.com
