Page MenuHomePhabricator

created a test case to verify the raw text section of xcoffobject file
ClosedPublic

Authored by DiggerLin on Nov 26 2019, 8:30 AM.

Details

Summary

in the patch https://reviews.llvm.org/D66969 . we need a test case to verify the out text section of the xcoffobject file is correct or not.

but we do not have llvm disassembly tools to dump the xcoffobjectfile . since we commit the patch https://reviews.llvm.org/D70255, we have tools for it. we create this test case for it.

Diff Detail

Event Timeline

DiggerLin created this revision.Nov 26 2019, 8:30 AM
Herald added a project: Restricted Project. · View Herald TranscriptNov 26 2019, 8:30 AM
daltenty added inline comments.
llvm/test/CodeGen/PowerPC/aix-xcoff-textdata.ll
1 ↗(On Diff #231075)

If find the name of this file a little confusing. I'd prefer aix-xcoff-textdisasembly.ll or the like.

15 ↗(On Diff #231075)

Out of curiosity why don't we see the .foo label? Binutils objdump appears to show it.

DiggerLin marked 4 inline comments as done.Dec 5 2019, 10:17 AM
DiggerLin added inline comments.
llvm/test/CodeGen/PowerPC/aix-xcoff-textdata.ll
1 ↗(On Diff #231075)

changed the test case name as your suggestion

15 ↗(On Diff #231075)

this is disassembly, for the symbol .text and .foo has the same address, the llvm-objdump use the .text(first met symbol entry in the symbol table) as label of memory address 0.

DiggerLin updated this revision to Diff 232384.Dec 5 2019, 10:18 AM
DiggerLin marked 2 inline comments as done.

changed test case filename

daltenty accepted this revision.Dec 5 2019, 12:38 PM

LGTM with minor nit

llvm/test/CodeGen/PowerPC/aix-xcoff-textdisasembly.ll
1 ↗(On Diff #232384)

nit: s/disasembly/disassembly/ (two s), sorry it was wrong in my earlier comment

This revision is now accepted and ready to land.Dec 5 2019, 12:38 PM

My understanding is that D66969 was also missing testing over the text section size and its effect on the BSS section's virtual address. Has that since been addressed?

My understanding is that D66969 was also missing testing over the text section size and its effect on the BSS section's virtual address. Has that since been addressed?

yes, there is no test section size in this patch, I will create a new patch for it.

This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.