This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH x86_64] Optimize access to globals in "-fpie -pie" builds with copy relocations
- From: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
- To: Sriraman Tallam <tmsriram at google dot com>
- Cc: "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>, Uros Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com>, "gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, David Li <davidxl at google dot com>, Cary Coutant <ccoutant at google dot com>
- Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2015 19:31:27 +0100
- Subject: Re: [PATCH x86_64] Optimize access to globals in "-fpie -pie" builds with copy relocations
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <CAMe9rOpkZZmuhL_rqYrAE6wx6u7QYWe-DjuKp11u5wPh1dGztA at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAAs8Hmw0-+jN9BKwPB2BkGhTZwrc9V3zsAW2QTCuKnZKz7NVAQ at mail dot gmail dot com> <20150203193615 dot GZ1746 at tucnak dot redhat dot com> <CAAs8HmwAx0GWcEsDYQhO-dNtage5=j=z47anoFPTz324WTvZPw at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAMe9rOrLwHdtsH2z_7dBpVKiJRtfT7iHaHO7wQ23o25TL7cTMw at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAAs8Hmw=Z9VeLz+MAY0X-POfkwXLFEsRFy8wEPDdyzVPV8ee=g at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAMe9rOouVu9Ndgf231iOt=ry0jWiw573H+y1KxycWkqSw=unOA at mail dot gmail dot com> <20150203221935 dot GA1746 at tucnak dot redhat dot com> <CAMe9rOq-A3YebgJ_xRnQDekYuvRw6C9GD9DYbhUizvr3OPad_Q at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAAs8Hmxdx1n+hgJ0oTAufPauz=S67oM2F_NAmyTzzUSh-ic=4Q at mail dot gmail dot com>
- Reply-to: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
On Wed, Feb 04, 2015 at 10:27:34AM -0800, Sriraman Tallam wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 5:16 PM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 2:19 PM, Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> wrote:
> >> On Tue, Feb 03, 2015 at 02:03:14PM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
> >>> So we aren't SYMBOL_REF_EXTERNAL_P nor
> >>> SYMBOL_REF_LOCAL_P. What do we reference?
> >>
> >> That is reasonable. There is no guarantee the extern weak symbol is local,
> >> it could very well be non-local. All that you know about the symbols is
> >> that its address is non-NULL in that case.
> >>
> >
> > This may be true for shared library. But it isn't true for PIE:
>
>
> Also, gcc and g++ are inconsistent about something even more simple:
>
> $ cat x.c
>
> int a;
>
> int main() {
> printf("%d\n", a);
> }
>
> With gcc -fPIE x.c
> SYMBOL_REF_LOCAL_P(op0) = false
>
> With g++ -fPIE x.c
> SYMBOL_REF_LOCAL_P(op0) = true
Try -fno-common for C and you'll get the same result as in C++.
Common symbols can't be considered SYMBOL_REF_LOCAL_P, they might resolve
to a non-common symbol from different TU.
Jakub