You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
[RISCV] Xqcilb: remove RISCVMCExpr::VK_QC_E_JUMP_PLT and drop @plt parsing
Follow-up to the just landed #135044 . Remove `@plt` parsing (only
needed by legacy `call foo@plt`). MCParser's `@` parsing is problematic.
Supporting target variations like (`foo+2@plt foo@plt+2 (foo+2)@plt`)
involves messy hacks. We should refrain from adding new `@` uses.
Remove unneeded `RISCVMCExpr::VK_QC_E_JUMP_PLT` (should only be used
when an instruction might have multiple reasonable relocations
https://maskray.me/blog/2025-03-16-relocation-generation-in-assemblers).
---
GCC's initial initial RISC-V port made a mistake by having both `call
foo` (non-PIC) and `call foo@plt` (PIC), likely misled by x86/SystemZ.
It was determined that the `@plt` was not needed. Since R_RISCV_CALL had
questionable undefined weak semantics in GNU ld (which has been removed
then), we kept R_RISCV_CALL_PLT and deprecated R_RISCV_CALL.
For RISC-V instructions, we only keep `@` in call/jump for backward
compatibility and discourage it for all other instructions.
(
There is disagreement about whether `PLT` in `JUMP_PLT` is useful or
misleading.
MaskRay's opnion: For new branch relocations with procedure call
semantics, use `_CALL` and avoid `_PLT` in the relocation name.
`_PLT` should only be used in data directives (e.g. R_RISCV_PLT32) to
indicate that the address of a function is not significant.
)
Pull Request: #135507
0 commit comments