From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 60965 invoked by alias); 9 Feb 2019 16:25:42 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 60956 invoked by uid 89); 9 Feb 2019 16:25:42 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-26.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,GIT_PATCH_0,GIT_PATCH_1,GIT_PATCH_2,GIT_PATCH_3,KAM_SHORT,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=H*F:D*ch, H*F:U*stefan, 2019-01-10, 20190110 X-HELO: mail.kmu-office.ch Received: from mail.kmu-office.ch (HELO mail.kmu-office.ch) (178.209.48.109) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Sat, 09 Feb 2019 16:25:39 +0000 Received: from webmail.kmu-office.ch (unknown [IPv6:2a02:418:6a02::a3]) by mail.kmu-office.ch (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 59D755C13D0; Sat, 9 Feb 2019 17:25:34 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=agner.ch; s=dkim; t=1549729534; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=dsJo+2liixH1+IWanz7iirtDizBE86N2cpj13pX99Bg=; b=wrizCfbTdsklV+66hFbLU3fhGUCo3L6NtY7s5epSURDegMGhK/9o3rIjvhwNjOxFJ0qVep +x6AvU0lg1/yRNEdMFqqPtTP8TPJp093OzYdBOP/9emZnGKJbLI5U6hMYYE6jVlY9xxTL4 bdnVJ2+KFgwIe29J8cuzX/88KJySTXQ= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Sat, 09 Feb 2019 16:25:00 -0000 From: Stefan Agner To: Kyrill Tkachov Cc: nickc@redhat.com, Richard Earnshaw , Ramana Radhakrishnan , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: fix -masm-syntax-unified (PR88648) In-Reply-To: <5C372EC6.50401@foss.arm.com> References: <5C346E5B.1060904@foss.arm.com> <5C372EC6.50401@foss.arm.com> Message-ID: <0576c88bdf79ad53f038cfb4a056786a@agner.ch> X-Sender: stefan@agner.ch User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.3.7 X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2019-02/txt/msg00567.txt.bz2 Hi Kyrill, On 10.01.2019 12:38, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: > Hi Stefan, > > On 08/01/19 09:33, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: >> Hi Stefan, >> >> On 01/01/19 23:34, Stefan Agner wrote: >> > This allows to use unified asm syntax when compiling for the >> > ARM instruction. This matches documentation and seems what the >> > initial patch was intended doing when the flag got added. >> > --- >> > gcc/config/arm/arm.c | 3 ++- >> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >> > >> > diff --git a/gcc/config/arm/arm.c b/gcc/config/arm/arm.c >> > index 3419b6bd0f8..67b2b199f3f 100644 >> > --- a/gcc/config/arm/arm.c >> > +++ b/gcc/config/arm/arm.c >> > @@ -3095,7 +3095,8 @@ arm_option_override_internal (struct gcc_options *opts, >> > >> > /* Thumb2 inline assembly code should always use unified syntax. >> > This will apply to ARM and Thumb1 eventually. */ >> > - opts->x_inline_asm_unified = TARGET_THUMB2_P (opts->x_target_flags); >> > + if (TARGET_THUMB2_P (opts->x_target_flags)) >> > + opts->x_inline_asm_unified = true; >> >> This looks right to me and is the logic we had in GCC 5. >> How has this patch been tested? >> >> Can you please provide a ChangeLog entry for this patch[1]. >> > > I've bootstrapped and tested this, together with your testsuite patch > on arm-none-linux-gnueabihf > and committed both with r267804 with the following ChangeLog entries: > > 2019-01-10 Stefan Agner > > PR target/88648 > * config/arm/arm.c (arm_option_override_internal): Force > opts->x_inline_asm_unified to true only if TARGET_THUMB2_P. > > 2019-01-10 Stefan Agner > > PR target/88648 > * gcc.target/arm/pr88648-asm-syntax-unified.c: Add test to > check if -masm-syntax-unified gets applied properly. > > Thank you for the patch. If you plan to contribute more patches in the > future I suggest you > sort out the copyright assignment paperwork. > > I believe this fix needs to be backported to the branches. > I'll do so after a few days of testing on trunk. Thanks for applying the patch! As far as I can see it did not made it into the branch yet, do you think it can get backported there too? -- Stefan > > Thanks again, > Kyrill > >> Thanks, >> Kyrill >> >> [1] https://gcc.gnu.org/contribute.html >> >> > >> > #ifdef SUBTARGET_OVERRIDE_INTERNAL_OPTIONS >> > SUBTARGET_OVERRIDE_INTERNAL_OPTIONS; >> > -- >> > 2.20.1 >> > >>