On 2020-04-13 10:08, will schmidt wrote:
On Fri, 2020-04-10 at 18:00 -0500, acsawdey via Gcc-patches wrote:
diff --git a/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.c b/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.c
index 2b6613bcb7e..c77e60a718f 100644
--- a/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.c
+++ b/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.c
@@ -24824,15 +24824,21 @@ address_to_insn_form (rtx addr,
if (GET_RTX_CLASS (GET_CODE (addr)) == RTX_AUTOINC)
return INSN_FORM_UPDATE;
- /* Handle PC-relative symbols and labels. Check for both local and
external
- symbols. Assume labels are always local. */
+ /* Handle PC-relative symbols and labels. Check for both local and
+ external symbols. Assume labels are always local. TLS symbols
+ are not PC-relative. */
Does the assumption need a qualifier for target rs6000? (or some
combination
of TLS/PC-relative?) There are users of the LABEL_REF_NONLOCAL_P()
for
mips,pa,sparc targets.
Yeah I think it's reasonable to say "TLS symbols are not PC-relative on
target
rs6000." That was certainly my intent.
Aaron
