On Fri, Oct 02, 2015 at 10:24:07AM +0930, Alan Modra wrote: > On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 12:18:08PM -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 12:14:44PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: > > > So even if not "easy", can you try? > > > > I did, and after half a day had a big mess and lots of things failing, > > no idea where this was headed, and in the meantime bootstrap still fails > > (on affected targets). > > I had a look too, and while you can revise the load_toc_v4_PIC > patterns to use labels emitted the usual way (eg. as in > i386.c:ix86_init_large_pic_reg) they tend to wander away from the > insn.
Yes, and only "bcl 20,31,$+4" avoids the link stack on recent CPUs (bcl 20,31,$+8, which we also use, doesn't). > I think that could be solved, but these labels which aren't > referred to by jump insns get converted to NOTE_INSN_DELETED_LABEL > somewhere, and that leads to further pain. Yes. You need to make the bcl a jump_insn to the label. And then there is yet more pain. Segher
