Message ID | 20220201204904.1827129-1-iii@linux.ibm.com |
---|---|
State | New |
Headers | show |
Series | IBM Z: fix `section type conflict` with -mindirect-branch-table | expand |
On 2/1/22 21:49, Ilya Leoshkevich wrote: > Bootstrapped and regtested on s390x-redhat-linux. Ok for master? > > > s390_code_end () puts indirect branch tables into separate sections and > tries to switch back to wherever it was in the beginning by calling > switch_to_section (current_function_section ()). > > First of all, this is unnecessary - the other backends don't do it. > > Furthermore, at this time there is no current function, but if the > last processed function was cold, in_cold_section_p remains set. This > causes targetm.asm_out.function_section () to call > targetm.section_type_flags (), which in absence of current function > decl classifies the section as SECTION_WRITE. This causes a section > type conflict with the existing SECTION_CODE. > > gcc/ChangeLog: > > * config/s390/s390.cc (s390_code_end): Do not switch back to > code section. > > gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: > > * gcc.target/s390/nobp-section-type-conflict.c: New test. Ok. Thanks! Andreas > --- > gcc/config/s390/s390.cc | 1 - > .../s390/nobp-section-type-conflict.c | 22 +++++++++++++++++++ > 2 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/s390/nobp-section-type-conflict.c > > diff --git a/gcc/config/s390/s390.cc b/gcc/config/s390/s390.cc > index 43c5c72554a..2db12d4ba4b 100644 > --- a/gcc/config/s390/s390.cc > +++ b/gcc/config/s390/s390.cc > @@ -16809,7 +16809,6 @@ s390_code_end (void) > assemble_name_raw (asm_out_file, label_start); > fputs ("-.\n", asm_out_file); > } > - switch_to_section (current_function_section ()); > } > } > } > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/s390/nobp-section-type-conflict.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/s390/nobp-section-type-conflict.c > new file mode 100644 > index 00000000000..5d78bc99bb5 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/s390/nobp-section-type-conflict.c > @@ -0,0 +1,22 @@ > +/* Checks that we don't get error: section type conflict with ‘put_page’. */ > + > +/* { dg-do compile } */ > +/* { dg-options "-mindirect-branch=thunk-extern -mfunction-return=thunk-extern -mindirect-branch-table -O2" } */ > + > +int a; > +int b (void); > +void c (int); > + > +static void > +put_page (void) > +{ > + if (b ()) > + c (a); > +} > + > +__attribute__ ((__section__ (".init.text"), __cold__)) void > +d (void) > +{ > + put_page (); > + put_page (); > +}
diff --git a/gcc/config/s390/s390.cc b/gcc/config/s390/s390.cc index 43c5c72554a..2db12d4ba4b 100644 --- a/gcc/config/s390/s390.cc +++ b/gcc/config/s390/s390.cc @@ -16809,7 +16809,6 @@ s390_code_end (void) assemble_name_raw (asm_out_file, label_start); fputs ("-.\n", asm_out_file); } - switch_to_section (current_function_section ()); } } } diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/s390/nobp-section-type-conflict.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/s390/nobp-section-type-conflict.c new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..5d78bc99bb5 --- /dev/null +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/s390/nobp-section-type-conflict.c @@ -0,0 +1,22 @@ +/* Checks that we don't get error: section type conflict with ‘put_page’. */ + +/* { dg-do compile } */ +/* { dg-options "-mindirect-branch=thunk-extern -mfunction-return=thunk-extern -mindirect-branch-table -O2" } */ + +int a; +int b (void); +void c (int); + +static void +put_page (void) +{ + if (b ()) + c (a); +} + +__attribute__ ((__section__ (".init.text"), __cold__)) void +d (void) +{ + put_page (); + put_page (); +}