Synchronize with google/gcc-4_9 to r224707 (from r214835)

Change-Id: I3d6f06fc613c8f8b6a82143dc44b7338483aac5d

1 files changed, 48 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/gcc-4.9/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/tree-prof/lipo/static1_0.C b/gcc-4.9/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/tree-prof/lipo/static1_0.C
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..525480dab
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc-4.9/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/tree-prof/lipo/static1_0.C
@@ -0,0 +1,48 @@
+// { dg-options "-std=c++11 -O2" }
+
+// A test case for static var promotion on targets like powerpc, where
+// the static initializer data is loaded via indirection through
+// TOC. Ensure that the global label for static initializer data is
+// unique via *.cmo* suffix.
+
+// Bug: after static var promotion in two different modules, we have
+// the following which leads to multiple definition of ._41" error during
+// link time.
+
+// Module 1                     Module 2
+//      .hidden ._41.cmo.1           .hidden ._41.cmo.3
+//      .globl ._41                  .globl ._41
+// ._41:                        ._41:
+//   ...                          ...
+
+
+// Instead we should use the appropriate unique names for initializer
+// data as in the following.
+
+// Module 1                     Module 2
+//      .hidden ._41.cmo.1           .hidden ._41.cmo.3
+//      .globl ._41.cmo.1            .globl ._41.cmo.3
+// ._41.cmo.1:                  ._41.cmo.3:
+// ...                          ...
+
+class A {
+ public:
+  int f(int x) const;
+};
+
+class B {
+ public:
+  int f(int x) const;
+};
+
+int main()
+{
+  A *a = new A();
+  B *b = new B();
+  int total = 0;
+  for (int i=0; i<3; ++i) {
+    total += a->f(1);
+    total += b->f(1);
+  }
+  return (total > 0) ? 0 : 1;
+}