On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 11:59 AM, Sriraman Tallam <tmsri...@google.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 10:51 AM, Andrew Pinski <pins...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 10:46 AM, Sriraman Tallam <tmsri...@google.com>
>> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 10:42 AM, Xinliang David Li <davi...@google.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> Why removing the tree_code check?
>>>
>>> The actual problem happens because STRING_CSTs (end up in .lrodata)
>>> are not set a far address as they dont match the VAR_DECL check here.
>>> Futher, "ix86_in_large_data_p" call has the TREE_CODE check to do the
>>> right thing so this seems unnecessary & buggy here.
>>
>> I think he is asking because TREE_STATIC (decl) || DECL_EXTERNAL
>> (decl) might be an issue for STRING_CSTs.
>
> TREE_STATIC is true for STRING_CSTs and DECL_EXTERNAL false, that looks ok.
The values for STRING_CST make sense, but it is not documented in
tree.h for use with STRING_CST. Maybe do this:
if (((TREE_CODE (decl) == VAR_DECL&& (TREE_STATIC (decl) ||
DECL_EXTERNAL (decl))
||TREE_CODE (decl) == STRING_CST)
&& ix86_in_large_data_p (decl))
which can be simplified to:
if ((TREE_CODE (decl) == VAR_DECL && is_global_var (decl) ||TREE_CODE
(decl) == STRING_CST)
&& ix86_in_large_data_p (decl))
...
David
>
> Thanks
> Sri
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Andrew
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Sri
>>>
>>>>
>>>> David
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 10:35 AM, Sriraman Tallam <tmsri...@google.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> This patch is under review for trunk GCC :
>>>>> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-10/msg01638.html.
>>>>>
>>>>> In the mean time, is this ok for google/gcc-4_9 branch? Without
>>>>> this, -mcmodel=medium is unusable if .lrodata goes beyond the 2G
>>>>> boundary.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks
>>>>> Sri
