| Message ID | 20120902142021.GA32216@intel.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
On Sun, Sep 2, 2012 at 7:20 AM, H.J. Lu <hongjiu.lu@intel.com> wrote: > Hi, > > When x86-64 TLS support was added by: > > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2002-10/msg01262.html > > it didn't allow negative offset. Jakub, do you remember the reason for > it? I tested this patch on Linux/x86-64 and used the new GCC to build > glibc for x86-64 and x32. There are no regressions. OK to install? > > Thanks. > > > H.J. > ---- > gcc/ > > 2012-09-02 H.J. Lu <hongjiu.lu@intel.com> > > PR target/54445 > * config/i386/predicates.md (x86_64_immediate_operand): Allow > negative offset for UNSPEC_DTPOFF/UNSPEC_NTPOFF. > > gcc/testsuite/ > 2012-09-02 H.J. Lu <hongjiu.lu@intel.com> > > PR target/54445 > * gcc.target/i386/pr54445-1.c: New file. > * gcc.target/i386/pr54445-2.c: Likewise. > > diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/predicates.md b/gcc/config/i386/predicates.md > index 55e4b56..159594e 100644 > --- a/gcc/config/i386/predicates.md > +++ b/gcc/config/i386/predicates.md > @@ -228,8 +228,7 @@ > { > case UNSPEC_DTPOFF: > case UNSPEC_NTPOFF: > - if (offset > 0 > - && trunc_int_for_mode (offset, SImode) == offset) > + if (trunc_int_for_mode (offset, SImode) == offset) > return true; > } > break; > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr54445-1.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr54445-1.c > new file mode 100644 > index 0000000..72ef84e > --- /dev/null > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr54445-1.c > @@ -0,0 +1,24 @@ > +/* { dg-do run } */ > +/* { dg-options "-O2" } */ > + > +__thread unsigned char tls_array[64]; > + > +unsigned char > +__attribute__ ((noinline)) > +tls_array_lookup_with_negative_constant(long long int position) { > + return tls_array[position - 1]; > +} > + > +int > +main () > +{ > + int i; > + > + for (i = 0; i < sizeof (tls_array) / sizeof (tls_array[0]); i++) > + tls_array[i] = i; > + > + for (i = 0; i < sizeof (tls_array) / sizeof (tls_array[0]); i++) > + if (i != tls_array_lookup_with_negative_constant (i + 1)) > + __builtin_abort (); > + return 0; > +} > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr54445-2.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr54445-2.c > new file mode 100644 > index 0000000..5151c13 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr54445-2.c > @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ > +/* { dg-do compile { target { *-*-linux* && { ! { ia32 } } } } } */ > +/* { dg-options "-O2 -fno-pic" } */ > + > +__thread unsigned char tls_array[64]; > + > +unsigned char > +tls_array_lookup_with_negative_constant(long long int position) { > + return tls_array[position - 1]; > +} > + > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler "mov(b|zbl)\[ \t\](%fs:)?tls_array@tpoff-1\\(%" } } */ Hi Uros, Is this OK? Thanks.
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 7:17 PM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote: >> When x86-64 TLS support was added by: >> >> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2002-10/msg01262.html >> >> it didn't allow negative offset. Jakub, do you remember the reason for >> it? I tested this patch on Linux/x86-64 and used the new GCC to build >> glibc for x86-64 and x32. There are no regressions. OK to install? > >> 2012-09-02 H.J. Lu <hongjiu.lu@intel.com> >> >> PR target/54445 >> * config/i386/predicates.md (x86_64_immediate_operand): Allow >> negative offset for UNSPEC_DTPOFF/UNSPEC_NTPOFF. >> >> gcc/testsuite/ >> 2012-09-02 H.J. Lu <hongjiu.lu@intel.com> >> >> PR target/54445 >> * gcc.target/i386/pr54445-1.c: New file. >> * gcc.target/i386/pr54445-2.c: Likewise. The spec does not require positive offsets, and truncations will be detected by the linker anyway. So, looks OK to me. Thanks, Uros.
diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/predicates.md b/gcc/config/i386/predicates.md index 55e4b56..159594e 100644 --- a/gcc/config/i386/predicates.md +++ b/gcc/config/i386/predicates.md @@ -228,8 +228,7 @@ { case UNSPEC_DTPOFF: case UNSPEC_NTPOFF: - if (offset > 0 - && trunc_int_for_mode (offset, SImode) == offset) + if (trunc_int_for_mode (offset, SImode) == offset) return true; } break; diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr54445-1.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr54445-1.c new file mode 100644 index 0000000..72ef84e --- /dev/null +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr54445-1.c @@ -0,0 +1,24 @@ +/* { dg-do run } */ +/* { dg-options "-O2" } */ + +__thread unsigned char tls_array[64]; + +unsigned char +__attribute__ ((noinline)) +tls_array_lookup_with_negative_constant(long long int position) { + return tls_array[position - 1]; +} + +int +main () +{ + int i; + + for (i = 0; i < sizeof (tls_array) / sizeof (tls_array[0]); i++) + tls_array[i] = i; + + for (i = 0; i < sizeof (tls_array) / sizeof (tls_array[0]); i++) + if (i != tls_array_lookup_with_negative_constant (i + 1)) + __builtin_abort (); + return 0; +} diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr54445-2.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr54445-2.c new file mode 100644 index 0000000..5151c13 --- /dev/null +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr54445-2.c @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ +/* { dg-do compile { target { *-*-linux* && { ! { ia32 } } } } } */ +/* { dg-options "-O2 -fno-pic" } */ + +__thread unsigned char tls_array[64]; + +unsigned char +tls_array_lookup_with_negative_constant(long long int position) { + return tls_array[position - 1]; +} + +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler "mov(b|zbl)\[ \t\](%fs:)?tls_array@tpoff-1\\(%" } } */