on 2024/6/13 21:24, Peter Bergner wrote:
> On 6/13/24 12:35 AM, Kewen.Lin wrote:
>>> @@ -826,7 +826,14 @@ rs6000_stack_info (void)
>>> info->ehrd_offset -= info->rop_hash_size;
>>> }
>>> else
>>> - info->ehrd_offset = info->gp_save_offset - ehrd_size;
>>> + {
>>> + info->ehrd_offset = info->gp_save_offset - ehrd_size;
>>> +
>>> + /* Adjust for ROP protection. */
>>> + info->rop_hash_save_offset
>>> + = info->gp_save_offset - info->rop_hash_size;
>>> + info->ehrd_offset -= info->rop_hash_size;
>>> + }
>>
>> I understand this is just copied from the if arm, but if I read this right,
>> it can be
>> simplified as:
>
> Ok, I'll retest with that simplification.
Thanks!
>>> +/* { dg-do assemble } */
>>> +/* { dg-options "-O2 -mdejagnu-cpu=power10 -mrop-protect -mno-vsx
>>> -mno-altivec -mabi=no-altivec -save-temps" } */
>>
>> I'd expect -mabi=no-altivec is default for -mno-altivec, but specifying it
>> explicitly
>> looks fine to me. :)
>
> That's what I expected too! :-) However, I was surprised to learn that
> -mno-altivec
> does *not* disable TARGET_ALTIVEC_ABI. I had to explicitly use the -mabi=
> option to
> expose the bug.
oh, it's surprising, I learn something today! :) I guess it's not intentional
but just no
one noticed it, as it seems nonsense to have altivec ABI extension but not
using any altivec
features.
BR,
Kewen
