lld/test/ELF/ppc64-toc-restore-recursive-call.s

   1 # REQUIRES: ppc
   2
   3 # RUN: llvm-mc -filetype=obj -triple=powerpc64le-unknown-linux %s -o %t.o
   4 # RUN: ld.lld -shared %t.o -o %t.so
   5 # RUN: llvm-objdump -d --no-show-raw-insn -r %t.so | FileCheck %s
   6
   7 # For a recursive call that is interposable the linker calls the plt-stub rather
   8 # then calling the function directly. Since the call is through a plt stub and
   9 # might be interposed with a different definition at runtime, a toc-restore is
  10 # required to follow the call.
  11
  12 # The decision to use a plt-stub for the recursive call is not one I feel
  13 # strongly about either way. It was done because it matches what bfd and gold do
  14 # for recursive calls as well as keeps the logic for recursive calls consistent
  15 # with non-recursive calls.
  16
  17 # CHECK-LABEL: 0000000000010290 <recursive_func>:
  18 # CHECK:       102b8:       bl 0x102e0
  19 # CHECK-NEXT:               ld 2, 24(1)
  20
  21 # CHECK-LABEL: 00000000000102e0 <__plt_recursive_func>:
  22
  23         .abiversion 2
  24         .section ".text"
  25         .p2align 2
  26         .global recursive_func
  27         .type recursive_func, @function
  28 recursive_func:
  29 .Lrf_gep:
  30     addis 2, 12, .TOC.-.Lrf_gep@ha
  31     addi  2, 2, .TOC.-.Lrf_gep@l
  32     .localentry recursive_func, .-recursive_func
  33     cmpldi 3, 2
  34     blt   0, .Lend
  35
  36     mflr 0
  37     std 0, 16(1)
  38     stdu 1, -32(1)
  39     addi 5, 3, -1
  40     mulld 4, 4, 3
  41     mr 3, 5
  42     bl recursive_func
  43     nop
  44     mr 4, 3
  45     addi 1, 1, 32
  46     ld 0, 16(1)
  47     mtlr 0
  48
  49 .Lend:
  50     extsw 3, 4
  51     blr