From: Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com>
Cc: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>,
Michael Meissner <meissner@linux.ibm.com>,
gcc@gcc.gnu.org, Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de>,
fortran@gcc.gnu.org, Tobias Burnus <tobias@codesourcery.com>,
Jonathan Wakely <jwakely@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: libgfortran.so SONAME and powerpc64le-linux ABI changes
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2021 19:16:54 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20211015001654.GI614@gate.crashing.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.22.394.2110112002300.1524986@digraph.polyomino.org.uk>
Hi!
On Mon, Oct 11, 2021 at 08:11:50PM +0000, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Oct 2021, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > But many CPUs do not have hardware floating point in any variant, and
> > their ABIs / calling conventions do not mention floating point at all.
> > Still, this works with GCC just fine: it passes floats and doubles the
> > same as 32-bit resp. 64-bit integers.
> >
> > binary16 and bfloat16 would be easy to support the same way, but it is a
> > bit harder for binary128, because we do not have a 128-bit integer type
>
> Supporting passing arguments (and return values) the same as an integer
> type of the same size is a *choice* (which comes with other choices - in
> particular, whether to say some or all the higher bits in the register or
> stack slot are sign-extended, zero-extended or undefined). It's a choice
> that should be made explicitly, and documented (in the relevant ABI if one
> is maintained), and coordinated between implementations when there's more
> than one implementation for the architecture trying to be compatible.
I don't disagree at all. But: GCC makes that choice for you, if you do
not. Many (embedded and/or older) targets do not. They get the
defaults, those just work, and /de facto/ become the standard.
In practice most such architectures are purely 32-bit, so there is no
sign/zero extension problem.
> We've had plenty of problems in the past with ABIs that were just what
> happened to fall out of the implementation (e.g. ABIs that depended on the
> details of what machine mode was assigned to a structure type...).
Yes.
And we still have problems on older ABIs with e.g. new C++ requirements
that did not exist >25 years ago when the ABIs were written. Not all of
this can be helped at all.
> On a related note, I'd encourage architecture maintainers to start
> thinking now about what exactly their ABIs should be for _BitInt
> (<http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n2763.pdf>, accepted as
> a required feature for C23 up to at least the width of unsigned long
> long), and documenting it and coordinating with other implementations
> where appropriate. There's a concrete proposal for x86_64 (see
> origin/usr/hjl/bitint branch at
> https://gitlab.com/x86-psABIs/x86-64-ABI.git) that may at least help as an
> indication of the sort of issues to address in such an ABI.
This should really go on gcc@, in a thread of its own, and a wiki page
might help as well?
Segher
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-10-15 0:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 77+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-10-04 10:07 Jakub Jelinek
2021-10-04 11:24 ` Richard Biener
2021-10-04 11:36 ` Jakub Jelinek
2021-10-04 12:31 ` Jakub Jelinek
2021-10-04 14:14 ` Jakub Jelinek
2021-10-04 16:47 ` Joseph Myers
2021-10-04 18:33 ` Segher Boessenkool
2021-10-04 19:24 ` Joseph Myers
2021-10-05 17:43 ` Segher Boessenkool
2021-10-14 19:39 ` Bill Schmidt
2021-10-15 0:26 ` Segher Boessenkool
2021-10-05 20:16 ` Thomas Koenig
2021-10-05 21:54 ` Segher Boessenkool
2021-10-06 6:59 ` Thomas Koenig
2021-10-06 15:17 ` Segher Boessenkool
2021-10-06 15:41 ` Jakub Jelinek
2021-10-06 16:07 ` Segher Boessenkool
2021-10-06 16:34 ` Jakub Jelinek
2021-10-06 16:59 ` Segher Boessenkool
2021-10-06 17:07 ` Jakub Jelinek
2021-10-06 17:50 ` Segher Boessenkool
2021-10-06 19:30 ` Peter Bergner
2021-10-06 17:13 ` Joseph Myers
2021-10-06 18:39 ` Segher Boessenkool
2021-10-06 19:42 ` Joseph Myers
2021-10-06 20:57 ` Segher Boessenkool
2021-10-06 21:55 ` Joseph Myers
2021-10-06 22:03 ` Joseph Myers
2021-10-08 17:53 ` Segher Boessenkool
2021-10-11 20:11 ` Joseph Myers
2021-10-15 0:16 ` Segher Boessenkool [this message]
2021-10-06 15:42 ` David Edelsohn
2021-10-06 16:19 ` Segher Boessenkool
2021-10-06 17:38 ` David Edelsohn
2021-10-07 3:42 ` Michael Meissner
2021-10-08 21:10 ` Segher Boessenkool
2021-10-07 9:48 ` Alastair McKinstry
2021-10-07 9:56 ` Andreas Schwab
2021-10-07 10:01 ` Jakub Jelinek
2021-10-07 12:43 ` Alastair McKinstry
2021-10-05 21:53 ` Jonathan Wakely
2021-10-07 3:35 ` Michael Meissner
2021-10-07 6:08 ` Thomas Koenig
2021-10-07 9:40 ` Jakub Jelinek
2021-10-07 15:24 ` Michael Meissner
2021-10-07 15:33 ` Jakub Jelinek
2021-10-08 6:35 ` Thomas Koenig
2021-10-08 7:20 ` Iain Sandoe
2021-10-08 16:26 ` Thomas Koenig
2021-10-08 19:11 ` Iain Sandoe
2021-10-08 22:55 ` Thomas Koenig
2021-10-08 23:18 ` Iain Sandoe
2021-10-09 9:11 ` Thomas Koenig
2021-10-09 9:19 ` Iain Sandoe
2021-10-09 9:25 ` Jakub Jelinek
2021-10-09 7:44 ` Andreas Schwab
2021-10-10 16:14 ` Florian Weimer
2021-10-15 13:50 ` Bill Schmidt
2021-10-15 14:20 ` Jakub Jelinek
2021-10-15 18:05 ` Thomas Koenig
2021-10-15 18:11 ` Jakub Jelinek
2021-10-15 18:58 ` Thomas Koenig
2021-10-15 22:24 ` Segher Boessenkool
2021-10-15 22:36 ` Segher Boessenkool
2021-10-18 19:02 ` Joseph Myers
2021-10-28 3:10 ` Michael Meissner
2021-10-29 3:36 ` libgfortran.so SONAME and powerpc64le-linux ABI changes (work in progress patches) Michael Meissner
2021-10-29 19:07 ` Thomas Koenig
2021-10-29 21:06 ` Michael Meissner
2021-11-01 15:56 ` Bill Schmidt
2021-11-02 15:40 ` Michael Meissner
2021-10-29 21:21 ` Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
2021-10-29 22:23 ` Michael Meissner
2021-10-30 0:16 ` libgfortran.so SONAME and powerpc64le-linux ABI changes (2nd patch) Michael Meissner
2021-10-30 9:30 ` Thomas Koenig
2021-10-30 10:03 ` Jakub Jelinek
2021-10-30 10:31 ` Thomas Koenig
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=20211015001654.GI614@gate.crashing.org \
--to=segher@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=fortran@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=jakub@redhat.com \
--cc=joseph@codesourcery.com \
--cc=jwakely@redhat.com \
--cc=meissner@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=tkoenig@netcologne.de \
--cc=tobias@codesourcery.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).