[Bug target/99652] New: inline doesn't with -mno-sse

[Bug target/99652] New: inline doesn't with -mno-sse

[hjl.tools at gmail dot com]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99652

            Bug ID: 99652
           Summary: inline doesn't with -mno-sse
           Product: gcc
           Version: 11.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: target
          Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
          Reporter: hjl.tools at gmail dot com
                CC: ubizjak at gmail dot com
  Target Milestone: ---

[hjl@gnu-cfl-2 tmp]$ cat x.c
inline double
foo (void)
{
  return 1.0;
}
[hjl@gnu-cfl-2 tmp]$ gcc -S x.c
[hjl@gnu-cfl-2 tmp]$ cat x.s
        .file   "x.c"
        .text
        .ident  "GCC: (GNU) 10.2.1 20210130 (Red Hat 10.2.1-11)"
        .section        .note.GNU-stack,"",@progbits
[hjl@gnu-cfl-2 tmp]$ gcc -S x.c -mno-sse
x.c: In function ‘foo’:
x.c:3:1: error: SSE register return with SSE disabled
    3 | {
      | ^
[hjl@gnu-cfl-2 tmp]$

[Bug target/99652] inline doesn't with -mno-sse

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99652

Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Resolution|---                         |INVALID
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |RESOLVED

--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I don't see why this is a bug. GCC decides the return register early on and
that is a good thing.

[Bug target/99652] inline doesn't with -mno-sse

[hjl.tools at gmail dot com]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99652

H.J. Lu <hjl.tools at gmail dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2021-03-18
             Status|RESOLVED                    |NEW
         Resolution|INVALID                     |---
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1

--- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu <hjl.tools at gmail dot com> ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> I don't see why this is a bug. GCC decides the return register early on and
> that is a good thing.

On arm64, I got

[hjl@gnu-cfl-2 gcc]$ cat /tmp/x.c
inline double
foo (void)
{
  return 1.0;
}
[hjl@gnu-cfl-2 gcc]$ ./xgcc -B./ -mgeneral-regs-only /tmp/x.c -S
[hjl@gnu-cfl-2 gcc]$

[Bug target/99652] inline doesn't with -mno-sse

[jakub at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99652

Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Doesn't really matter.  On x86_64 the ABI says that double is returned in a SSE
register, so people either can't return floating point types (and pass floating
point arguments to functions), or shouldn't disable SSE.

[Bug target/99652] inline doesn't with -mno-sse

[hjl.tools at gmail dot com]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99652

H.J. Lu <hjl.tools at gmail dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           See Also|                            |https://sourceware.org/bugz
                   |                            |illa/show_bug.cgi?id=27600

--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu <hjl.tools at gmail dot com> ---
We run into this with Intel UINTR on <stdlib.h>:

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27600

We'd like to allow <stdlib.h> with -mgeneral-regs-only.

[Bug target/99652] inline doesn't with -mno-sse

[ubizjak at gmail dot com]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99652

--- Comment #5 from Uroš Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com> ---
inline long double
foo (void)
{
  return 1.0;
}
gcc -S -O2 -mno-80387 double.c
double.c: In function ‘foo’:
double.c:3:1: error: x87 register return with x87 disabled
    3 | {
      | ^

[Bug target/99652] inline doesn't with -mno-sse

[cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99652

--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The master branch has been updated by H.J. Lu <hjl@gcc.gnu.org>:

https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5e2eabe1eed1e53d39923517122d3c7de2013ad4

commit r11-7735-g5e2eabe1eed1e53d39923517122d3c7de2013ad4
Author: H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu Mar 18 11:47:46 2021 -0700

    x86: Issue error for return/argument only with function body

    If we never generate function body, we shouldn't issue errors for return
    nor argument.  Add silent_p to i386 machine_function to avoid issuing
    errors for return and argument without function body.

    gcc/

            PR target/99652
            * config/i386/i386-options.c (ix86_init_machine_status): Set
            silent_p to true.
            * config/i386/i386.c (init_cumulative_args): Set silent_p to
            false.
            (construct_container): Return early for return and argument
            errors if silent_p is true.
            * config/i386/i386.h (machine_function): Add silent_p.

    gcc/testsuite/

            PR target/99652
            * gcc.dg/torture/pr99652-1.c: New test.
            * gcc.dg/torture/pr99652-2.c: Likewise.
            * gcc.target/i386/pr57655.c: Adjusted.
            * gcc.target/i386/pr59794-6.c: Likewise.
            * gcc.target/i386/pr70738-1.c: Likewise.
            * gcc.target/i386/pr96744-1.c: Likewise.

[Bug target/99652] inline doesn't with -mno-sse

[hjl.tools at gmail dot com]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99652

H.J. Lu <hjl.tools at gmail dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Target Milestone|---                         |11.0
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|---                         |FIXED

--- Comment #7 from H.J. Lu <hjl.tools at gmail dot com> ---
Fixed for GCC 11.