On Thu, 30 Dec 2021 08:28:34 PST (-0800), gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org wrote:
On 12/29/2021 8:02 PM, jiawei wrote:
Add -msmall-data-limit option to put global and static data into right
section and generate 'btt_info' on RISC-V target.
BTF (BPF Type Format) is the metadata format which encodes the debug info
related to BPF program/map, more details on:
https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/bpf/index.html#bpf-type-format-btf
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* gcc.dg/debug/btf/btf-datasec-1.c: Add riscv target support.
Is the goal here to get the variable "d" out of the small data section
and into the standard data section? It's not clear from your description .
Neither an ACK nor a NAK at this point. I need to understand better
what you're trying to accomplish.
IIUC that's what this is doing, though the commit message isn't clear at
all. That saind, it might be better to do something like
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/debug/btf/btf-datasec-1.c
b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/debug/btf/btf-datasec-1.c
index dbb236bbda1..c0ad77d40aa 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/debug/btf/btf-datasec-1.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/debug/btf/btf-datasec-1.c
@@ -22,9 +22,9 @@
/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "0\[\t \]+\[^\n\]*bts_offset" 7 } } */
/* Check that strings for each DATASEC have been added to the BTF string table. */
-/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "ascii \".data.0\"\[\t
\]+\[^\n\]*btf_aux_string" 1 } } */
-/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "ascii \".rodata.0\"\[\t
\]+\[^\n\]*btf_aux_string" 1 } } */
-/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "ascii \".bss.0\"\[\t
\]+\[^\n\]*btf_aux_string" 1 } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "ascii \".[s]?data.0\"\[\t
\]+\[^\n\]*btf_aux_string" 1 } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "ascii \".[s]?rodata.0\"\[\t
\]+\[^\n\]*btf_aux_string" 1 } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "ascii \".[s]?bss.0\"\[\t
\]+\[^\n\]*btf_aux_string" 1 } } */
int a;
long long b;
as whether specific symbols end up in .data or .sdata is really just an
optimization and either should be sufficiently correct.
IIRC some targets have other flavors of these, PPC's .sdata2 comes to
mind. Not sure if we'd need that to drop their -msdata=none flag.
