From: Michael Eager <eager@eagercon.com>
To: "Frager, Neal" <neal.frager@amd.com>, Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
Cc: "Erkiaga Elorza, Ibai" <ibai.erkiaga-elorza@amd.com>,
"Mekala, Nagaraju" <nagaraju.mekala@amd.com>,
"Hatle, Mark" <mark.hatle@amd.com>,
"Mutyala, Sadanand" <sadanand.mutyala@amd.com>,
"Nali, Appa Rao" <appa.rao.nali@amd.com>,
"Hunsigida, Vidhumouli" <vidhumouli.hunsigida@amd.com>,
"luca.ceresoli@bootlin.com" <luca.ceresoli@bootlin.com>,
"binutils@sourceware.org" <binutils@sourceware.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] gas: expr: fix support .long 0U and .long 0u
Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2023 09:34:19 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7fae40fc-0a1e-e38e-0836-9bd78bf78887@eagercon.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CH2PR12MB500486E747FD95AC4EC6B796F0C6A@CH2PR12MB5004.namprd12.prod.outlook.com>
On 10/1/23 09:22, Frager, Neal wrote:
>>> Fix support for .long 0U and .long 0u in GCC.
>>>
>>> This patch has been tested for years of AMD Xilinx Yocto releases as
>>> part of the following patch set:
>>>
>>> https://github.com/Xilinx/meta-xilinx/tree/master/meta-microblaze/rec
>>> ipes-devtools/binutils/binutils
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Neal Frager <neal.frager@amd.com>
>>> ---
>>> gas/expr.c | 9 +++++++++
>>> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
>>
>> Without a testcase demonstrating what's wrong, I'd almost be inclined
>> to say that ...
>>
>>> --- a/gas/expr.c
>>> +++ b/gas/expr.c
>>> @@ -824,6 +824,15 @@ operand (expressionS *expressionP, enum expr_mode mode)
>>> break;
>>> }
>>> }
>>> + if ((*input_line_pointer == 'U') || (*input_line_pointer == 'u'))
>>> + {
>>> + input_line_pointer--;
>>> +
>>> + integer_constant ((NUMBERS_WITH_SUFFIX || flag_m68k_mri)
>>> + ? 0 : 10,
>>> + expressionP);
>>> + break;
>>> + }
>>> c = *input_line_pointer;
>>> switch (c)
>>> {
>>
>> ... this ought to be covered by logic in integer_constant() already.
>> But I think I see what the issue is. Nevertheless, go look for
>> tc_allow_U_suffix, which wants using here as well. Further I think the
>> same issue then exists for L/l suffixes?
>>
>> Plus I think you want to add the new code to the switch() statement
>> rather than immediately ahead of it.
>>
>> Jan
>>
>
> Hi Michael, Jan,
>
>> Neal --
>
>> Can you provide a test case for this patch? I'm not able to reproduce any error.
>
>> Please take a look at gas/expr.c:541-543 (PR 19910: Look for, and ignore, a U suffix to the number). Is this a fix for the same issue?
>> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19910
>
>> As Jan says, it looks like this code, if needed, should be in the switch
>> statement.
>
> Thank you for your review.
>
> I would just like to clarify where this patch is coming from.
> I am not actually the author of the patches I am submitting.
> When we provide a Microblaze toolchain with PetaLinux, Yocto or Vitis, we are actually applying all of the following patches to the binutils portion of the toolchain:
> https://github.com/Xilinx/meta-xilinx/tree/master/meta-microblaze/recipes-devtools/binutils/binutils
>
> Instead of continuing to carry the maintenance of this patch set with all of our releases, I would like to get as many of these patches upstreamed as possible.
>
> This particular patch is coming from here:
> https://github.com/Xilinx/meta-xilinx/blob/master/meta-microblaze/recipes-devtools/binutils/binutils/0009-Patch-Microblaze-fixed-bug-in-GCC-so-that-It-will-su.patch
>
> It is possible that this patch is not required anymore. I will check internally at AMD Xilinx to see if I can identify a way to reproduce the error that this patch is solving.
>
> Until I can prove that this patch is still needed, let's skip it. If it is really no longer necessary, I will try to get it removed from our list of patches.
>
> Thanks for your help!
>
> Best regards,
> Neal Frager
> AMD
Hi Neal --
In general, a patch needs to be for a confirmed bug, not hypothetical
and not for a problem that has already been fixed. It also needs to
build with the top-of-tree sources cleanly. If possible, there should
be a test case which shows that there is a bug and that the patch fixes is.
When you sign off on a patch, that means that you are affirming that you
have reviewed the patch and confirmed that this is the case.
This reduces the amount of effort that I and others have to expend to
review patches and avoids adding unnecessary changes to the source.
--
Michael Eager
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-10-01 16:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-09-27 13:21 Neal Frager
2023-09-27 13:33 ` Jan Beulich
2023-09-28 19:27 ` Michael Eager
2023-10-01 16:22 ` Frager, Neal
2023-10-01 16:34 ` Michael Eager [this message]
2023-10-01 18:06 ` Frager, Neal
2023-10-16 9:18 ` Jan Beulich
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=7fae40fc-0a1e-e38e-0836-9bd78bf78887@eagercon.com \
--to=eager@eagercon.com \
--cc=appa.rao.nali@amd.com \
--cc=binutils@sourceware.org \
--cc=ibai.erkiaga-elorza@amd.com \
--cc=jbeulich@suse.com \
--cc=luca.ceresoli@bootlin.com \
--cc=mark.hatle@amd.com \
--cc=nagaraju.mekala@amd.com \
--cc=neal.frager@amd.com \
--cc=sadanand.mutyala@amd.com \
--cc=vidhumouli.hunsigida@amd.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).