From 472eab9ab1fdfd0ba3a555ea9eb50e20307c7052 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Jiufu Guo <guojiufu@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2024 13:34:20 +0800
Subject: [PATCH] report message for operator %a on unaddressible operand

Hi,

For PR96866, when printing asm code for modifier "%a", an addressable
operand is required.  While the constraint "X" allow any kind of
operand even which is hard to get the address directly. e.g. extern
symbol whose address is in TOC.
An error message would be reported to indicate the invalid asm operand.

Compare with previous version, test case is updated with -mno-pcrel.

Bootstrap&regtest pass on ppc64{,le}.
Is this ok for trunk?

BR,
Jeff(Jiufu Guo)

	PR target/96866

gcc/ChangeLog:

	* config/rs6000/rs6000.cc (print_operand_address): Emit message for
	unsupported operand.

gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:

	* gcc.target/powerpc/pr96866-1.c: New test.
	* gcc.target/powerpc/pr96866-2.c: New test.
---
 gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.cc                  |  7 ++++++-
 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr96866-1.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr96866-2.c | 13 +++++++++++++
 3 files changed, 37 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
 create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr96866-1.c
 create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr96866-2.c

diff --git a/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.cc b/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.cc
index 85211565eb4..0bcc6a2d0ab 100644
--- a/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.cc
+++ b/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.cc
@@ -14706,7 +14706,12 @@ print_operand_address (FILE *file, rtx x)
 	fprintf (file, "@%s(%s)", SMALL_DATA_RELOC,
 		 reg_names[SMALL_DATA_REG]);
       else
-	gcc_assert (!TARGET_TOC);
+	{
+	  /* Do not support getting address directly from TOC, emit error.
+	     No more work is needed for !TARGET_TOC. */
+	  if (TARGET_TOC)
+	    output_operand_lossage ("%%a requires an address of memory");
+	}
     }
   else if (GET_CODE (x) == PLUS && REG_P (XEXP (x, 0))
 	   && REG_P (XEXP (x, 1)))
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr96866-1.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr96866-1.c
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..72e59a19753
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr96866-1.c
@@ -0,0 +1,18 @@
+/* The "%a" modifier can't get the address of extern symbol directly from TOC
+   with -fPIC, even the symbol is propagated for "X" constraint under -O2. */
+/* { dg-options "-fPIC -O2 -mno-pcrel" } */
+
+/* It's to verify no ICE here, ignore error messages about invalid 'asm'.  */
+/* { dg-excess-errors "pr96866-1.c" } */
+
+int x[2];
+
+int __attribute__ ((noipa))
+f1 (void)
+{
+  int n;
+  int *p = x;
+  *p++;
+  __asm__ volatile("ld %0, %a1" : "=r"(n) : "X"(p));
+  return n;
+}
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr96866-2.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr96866-2.c
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..72bb15fa04f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr96866-2.c
@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
+/* The "%a" modifier can't get the address of extern symbol directly from TOC
+   with -fPIC. */
+/* { dg-options "-fPIC -O2 -mno-pcrel" } */
+
+/* It's to verify no ICE here, ignore error messages about invalid 'asm'.  */
+/* { dg-excess-errors "pr96866-2.c" } */
+
+void
+f (void)
+{
+  extern int x;
+  __asm__ volatile("#%a0" ::"X"(&x));
+}