| Message ID | 094cb176f757b333c6a3e740bac8c80b7b547a5f.1516855807.git.segher@kernel.crashing.org |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | rs6000: Fix safe-indirect-jump-[18].c | expand |
On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 2:27 PM, Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org> wrote: > Thist patch merges the safe-indirect-jump-1.c and -8.c testcases, > since they do the same thing. On the 64-bit and AIX ABIs the indirect > call is not a sibcall, since there is code generated after the call > (the restore of r2). On the 32-bit non-AIX ABIs it is a sibcall. > > Tested on powerpc64-linux {-m32,-m64}, and on powerpc-ibm-aix7.1.3.0 . > Is this okay for trunk and 7 branch? > > > Segher > > > 2018-01-26 Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org> > > gcc/testsuite/ > * gcc.target/powerpc/safe-indirect-jump-1.c: Build on all targets. > Make expected output depend on whether we expect sibcalls or not. > * gcc.target/powerpc/safe-indirect-jump-8.c: Delete (merged into > safe-indirect-jump-1.c). Okay. Thanks, David
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/safe-indirect-jump-1.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/safe-indirect-jump-1.c index 99cfab2..d1ab83a 100644 --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/safe-indirect-jump-1.c +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/safe-indirect-jump-1.c @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ -/* { dg-do compile { target { lp64 } } } */ +/* { dg-do compile } */ /* { dg-additional-options "-mno-speculate-indirect-jumps" } */ /* Test for deliberate misprediction of indirect calls. */ @@ -11,4 +11,10 @@ int bar () } /* { dg-final { scan-assembler "crset 2" } } */ -/* { dg-final { scan-assembler "beqctrl-" } } */ + +/* The AIX and ELFv2 ABIs don't allow a sibcall here. */ +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler "beqctrl-" { target { lp64 || { powerpc*-*-aix* } } } } } */ + +/* The other ABIs do allow a sibcall. */ +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler "beqctr-" { target { ilp32 && !powerpc*-*-aix* } } } } */ +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler {b \$} { target { ilp32 && !powerpc*-*-aix* } } } } */ diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/safe-indirect-jump-8.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/safe-indirect-jump-8.c deleted file mode 100644 index 0a6f231..0000000 --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/safe-indirect-jump-8.c +++ /dev/null @@ -1,16 +0,0 @@ -/* { dg-do compile { target { ilp32 } } } */ -/* { dg-skip-if "" { powerpc*-*-aix* } } */ -/* { dg-additional-options "-O2 -mno-speculate-indirect-jumps" } */ - -/* Test for deliberate misprediction of -m32 sibcalls. */ - -extern int (*f)(); - -int bar () -{ - return (*f) (); -} - -/* { dg-final { scan-assembler "crset 2" } } */ -/* { dg-final { scan-assembler "beqctr-" } } */ -/* { dg-final { scan-assembler {b \$} } } */
Thist patch merges the safe-indirect-jump-1.c and -8.c testcases, since they do the same thing. On the 64-bit and AIX ABIs the indirect call is not a sibcall, since there is code generated after the call (the restore of r2). On the 32-bit non-AIX ABIs it is a sibcall. Tested on powerpc64-linux {-m32,-m64}, and on powerpc-ibm-aix7.1.3.0 . Is this okay for trunk and 7 branch? Segher 2018-01-26 Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org> gcc/testsuite/ * gcc.target/powerpc/safe-indirect-jump-1.c: Build on all targets. Make expected output depend on whether we expect sibcalls or not. * gcc.target/powerpc/safe-indirect-jump-8.c: Delete (merged into safe-indirect-jump-1.c). --- gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/safe-indirect-jump-1.c | 10 ++++++++-- gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/safe-indirect-jump-8.c | 16 ---------------- 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-) delete mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/safe-indirect-jump-8.c