ZhiyaoMa98 added a comment.
Just in case you assume that I have push permission, unfortunately I do not.
Could you help me merge the patch in? Thanks.
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D136203/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D136203
___
ZhiyaoMa98 updated this revision to Diff 469049.
ZhiyaoMa98 marked an inline comment as done.
ZhiyaoMa98 added a comment.
Remove the unused `GA` variable.
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D136203/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D136203
Files:
clang/lib/Driver/ToolChains/Arc
ZhiyaoMa98 updated this revision to Diff 468973.
ZhiyaoMa98 marked an inline comment as done.
ZhiyaoMa98 added a comment.
Updated the comment to reflect that now we allow using `-mlong-calls` with
`-mexecute-only`.
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D136203/new/
https://revie
ZhiyaoMa98 added a comment.
> Then just assert we aren't execute-only in the non-movw path.
When we are not execute-only, existing code handles it by using constant pools
and we are all good.
In the case where we are execute-only and long-calls at the same time, we
assert that we have `movt` l
ZhiyaoMa98 updated this revision to Diff 468957.
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D136203/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D136203
Files:
clang/lib/Driver/ToolChains/Arch/ARM.cpp
clang/test/Driver/arm-execute-only.c
llvm/lib/Target/ARM/ARMISelLowering.cpp
llvm/test/CodeG
ZhiyaoMa98 marked an inline comment as done.
ZhiyaoMa98 added a comment.
I have updated the diff to avoid the extra indirection. I am thinking about
adding a new option, say `-mgot-calls` to allow code generation with the extra
indirection. Is it sensible and shall I create another diff to discu
ZhiyaoMa98 updated this revision to Diff 468928.
ZhiyaoMa98 edited the summary of this revision.
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D136203/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D136203
Files:
clang/lib/Driver/ToolChains/Arch/ARM.cpp
clang/test/Driver/arm-execute-only.c
llvm/lib/
ZhiyaoMa98 added a comment.
Unfortunately, `-fPIE` seems not to be generating the PLT on LLVM for embedded
ARM.
C source file (test.c):
extern void bar(void);
void foo(void) {
bar();
}
LLVM with `clang -O2 -fPIE -fsemantic-interposition -mlong-calls
--target=armv7em-none-eabi -c t
ZhiyaoMa98 added a comment.
> Can you describe a little more what you're trying to do here?
Sure. My eventual goal is to enable fine-granular live-update on ARM based
microcontrollers, which requires the system to do some relocation at runtime.
Below I will describe the challenge with a simple
ZhiyaoMa98 added a comment.
@efriedma Thank you for your suggestion. I will remove the extra indirection.
I was wondering if you could also provide some insights about the RWPI case. I
believe the same optimization also applies to RWPI. However, I actually want to
store the function address as
ZhiyaoMa98 created this revision.
ZhiyaoMa98 added reviewers: labrinea, rengolin.
Herald added subscribers: hiraditya, kristof.beyls.
Herald added a project: All.
ZhiyaoMa98 requested review of this revision.
Herald added subscribers: cfe-commits, MaskRay.
Herald added projects: clang, LLVM.
Promo
ZhiyaoMa98 created this revision.
ZhiyaoMa98 added reviewers: rsmith, llvm-commits.
Herald added a project: All.
ZhiyaoMa98 requested review of this revision.
Herald added a project: clang.
Herald added a subscriber: cfe-commits.
Add missing if branch for "ropi", "rwpi" and "ropi-rwpi" relocation
12 matches
Mail list logo
