public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "bergner at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/98519] rs6000: @pcrel unsupported on this instruction error in pveclib
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 2021 23:48:14 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-98519-4-zCGOWgTcOr@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-98519-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98519
--- Comment #20 from Peter Bergner <bergner at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Alan Modra from comment #18)
> Isn't this a bug in the assembly? We've changed the ABI, there is no way
> anyone can expect all old asm to work with power10 pcrel. To support pcrel
> you need new asm.
>
> #ifdef __PCREL__
> __asm__ (pcrel version);
> #else
> __asm__ (non-pcrel version);
> #endif
>
> No need for special constraints, I think. (And not sufficient if we had
> them.)
I agree with Segher that we can't state that all old inline asm that uses "m"
is buggy if/when compiled with -mcpu=power10. There's just way too much use of
it.
That said, I'm interested in why you don't think a new special pcrel constraint
would be sufficient?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-01-23 23:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-01-04 22:12 [Bug target/98519] New: " bergner at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-04 22:19 ` [Bug target/98519] " bergner at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-04 23:08 ` meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-04 23:23 ` bergner at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-04 23:49 ` segher at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-05 1:18 ` munroesj at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-05 1:23 ` segher at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-05 1:55 ` munroesj at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-05 3:09 ` segher at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-05 3:28 ` meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-05 14:13 ` wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-05 15:01 ` segher at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-05 16:45 ` wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-05 17:31 ` bergner at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-05 21:08 ` wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-05 22:07 ` meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-13 22:07 ` segher at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-13 23:40 ` segher at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-22 6:14 ` amodra at gmail dot com
2021-01-22 18:07 ` segher at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-23 23:48 ` bergner at gcc dot gnu.org [this message]
2021-02-02 4:17 ` meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-02-02 4:34 ` meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-02-02 21:30 ` segher at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-02-02 23:28 ` meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-02-16 16:45 ` meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-02-16 16:48 ` meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-02-16 16:49 ` meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-02-16 23:06 ` segher at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-10-03 19:49 ` bergner at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-10-03 21:07 ` segher at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-10-03 22:18 ` bergner at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-10-03 22:41 ` segher at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-10-03 23:54 ` bergner at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-10-10 16:00 ` segher at gcc dot gnu.org
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-98519-4-zCGOWgTcOr@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: 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).