public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "sebastian.huber@embedded-brains.de" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug testsuite/106680] Test gcc.target/powerpc/bswap64-4.c fails on 32-bit BE Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2024 13:08:24 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-106680-4-1aQ43oLK7D@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-106680-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106680 --- Comment #10 from Sebastian Huber <sebastian.huber@embedded-brains.de> --- (In reply to Kewen Lin from comment #9) > Note that now we only disable implicit powerpc64 for -m32 when the > OS_MISSING_POWERPC64 is set. > > /* Don't expect powerpc64 enabled on those OSes with OS_MISSING_POWERPC64, > since they do not save and restore the high half of the GPRs correctly > in all cases. If the user explicitly specifies it, we won't interfere > with the user's specification. */ > #ifdef OS_MISSING_POWERPC64 > if (OS_MISSING_POWERPC64 > && TARGET_32BIT > && TARGET_POWERPC64 > && !(rs6000_isa_flags_explicit & OPTION_MASK_POWERPC64)) > rs6000_isa_flags &= ~OPTION_MASK_POWERPC64; > #endif > > But rtems.h doesn't define OS_MISSING_POWERPC64 RTEMS supports the 64-bit PowerPC for the 64-bit multilibs. > > gcc/config/rs6000/linux.h:#define OS_MISSING_POWERPC64 1 > gcc/config/rs6000/freebsd64.h:#define OS_MISSING_POWERPC64 !TARGET_64BIT > gcc/config/rs6000/aix.h:#define OS_MISSING_POWERPC64 1 > gcc/config/rs6000/linux64.h:#define OS_MISSING_POWERPC64 !TARGET_64BIT > > meanwhile cpu "e6500" has MASK_POWERPC64 set by default (it's 64bit core). > > That's why you still have powerpc64 flag set when you specify -m32 on rtems. For some applications, you don't need the 64-bit support on the e6500 machines. So, we have 32-bit and 64-bit multilibs. This is just a performance optimization for some applications.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-02-05 13:08 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top [not found] <bug-106680-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> 2022-08-29 8:52 ` linkw at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-12-27 10:14 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-01-04 5:21 ` linkw at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-01-20 11:27 ` sebastian.huber@embedded-brains.de 2024-01-20 11:33 ` sebastian.huber@embedded-brains.de 2024-02-05 12:54 ` linkw at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-02-05 13:01 ` sebastian.huber@embedded-brains.de 2024-02-05 13:03 ` linkw at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-02-05 13:08 ` sebastian.huber@embedded-brains.de [this message] 2024-02-05 13:24 ` linkw at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-02-05 13:30 ` linkw at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-02-05 13:38 ` sebastian.huber@embedded-brains.de 2024-02-07 14:08 ` sebastian.huber@embedded-brains.de
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=bug-106680-4-1aQ43oLK7D@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \ --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \ --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \ /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: linkBe 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).