This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [Google/gcc-4_9][PATCH][target/x86_64] PR 63538
- From: Xinliang David Li <davidxl at google dot com>
- To: Sriraman Tallam <tmsriram at google dot com>
- Cc: GCC Patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Jan Hubicka <hubicka at ucw dot cz>, Cary Coutant <ccoutant at google dot com>, Paul Pluzhnikov <ppluzhnikov at google dot com>
- Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2014 10:59:29 -0700
- Subject: Re: [Google/gcc-4_9][PATCH][target/x86_64] PR 63538
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <CAAs8HmzszJ+Pzm_pd0QjHNhbYsDhSrMGyq4zeC73pTD_Ws2_Yg at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAAkRFZJH6UiUOLE+ca-5oRXWt0_Bdqv1m8uxRK=XbgiezMnVUg at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAAs8Hmx9c+Kzz7mgw7OYX18Soex2oXJ_prN+3HQEuXf6p9aJ6g at mail dot gmail dot com>
Perhaps explicitly allowing STRING_CST to go through the large data
check, instead of removing the var-decl check? Do you see other
opcodes that need to be handled too?
On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 10:46 AM, Sriraman Tallam <email@example.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 10:42 AM, Xinliang David Li <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> Why removing the tree_code check?
> The actual problem happens because STRING_CSTs (end up in .lrodata)
> are not set a far address as they dont match the VAR_DECL check here.
> Futher, "ix86_in_large_data_p" call has the TREE_CODE check to do the
> right thing so this seems unnecessary & buggy here.
>> On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 10:35 AM, Sriraman Tallam <email@example.com> wrote:
>>> This patch is under review for trunk GCC :
>>> In the mean time, is this ok for google/gcc-4_9 branch? Without
>>> this, -mcmodel=medium is unusable if .lrodata goes beyond the 2G