From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from esa3.mentor.iphmx.com (esa3.mentor.iphmx.com [68.232.137.180]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 62EC33858D33 for ; Tue, 10 Jan 2023 20:33:19 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 62EC33858D33 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=codesourcery.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=mentor.com X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.96,315,1665475200"; d="scan'208";a="92821947" Received: from orw-gwy-02-in.mentorg.com ([192.94.38.167]) by esa3.mentor.iphmx.com with ESMTP; 10 Jan 2023 12:33:16 -0800 IronPort-SDR: FuPmVbPeKjZ4ypDyoejjZ41ObtpWDf9n1J7InRhOUwdNT/jpoqrywrFMuZe4vvPUV1/rxcUxsY LNNcH0ozFhU+WiOsN9VTS991SAJ5VB10Y88rmntpemwQ6+m9Bg2/eRzG2+9z5FpYf34gLSPcgm IGqMAmp6B9Cxe+Kwgvv8KNhvesbMSKLXwcAhCL2SIDDRUoxWG6TBTnNSzzIFMQNqbDRCV4xmlP ZJi5cIBJj7KMB1QhgaFXGK3wgewgQXDN1rkDVH5MqmxWbNqPvKVVAVUpRUaJ0pWMrblOK5x9fF gZw= Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2023 20:33:11 +0000 From: Joseph Myers To: Adhemerval Zanella Netto CC: Segher Boessenkool , Richard Biener , Subject: Re: [PATCH] longlong.h: Do no use asm input cast for clang In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <1729cf38-40f4-900-e52b-2a2e1467c377@codesourcery.com> References: <20221130181625.2011166-1-adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org> <20221130232456.GT25951@gate.crashing.org> <3e4bc189-7d73-f875-b425-61dde1a86e34@linaro.org> <20221212235240.GF25951@gate.crashing.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" X-Originating-IP: [137.202.0.90] X-ClientProxiedBy: svr-ies-mbx-13.mgc.mentorg.com (139.181.222.13) To svr-ies-mbx-10.mgc.mentorg.com (139.181.222.10) X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3109.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,KAM_DMARC_STATUS,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,TXREP autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: On Tue, 10 Jan 2023, Adhemerval Zanella Netto via Gcc-patches wrote: > That's my original intention [1], but Joseph stated that GCC is the upstream > source of this file. Joseph, would you be ok for a similar patch to glibc > since gcc is reluctant to accept it? I don't think it's a good idea for the copies to diverge. I also think the file is more heavily used in GCC (as part of the libgcc sources, effectively) than in glibc and so it's best to use GCC as the upstream for this shared file. Ideally maybe most of the macros in this file would be replaced by built-in functions (that are guaranteed to expand inline rather than possibly circularly calling a libgcc function defined using the same macro), so that the inline asm could be avoided (when building libgcc, or when building glibc with a new-enough compiler). But that would be a substantial project. -- Joseph S. Myers joseph@codesourcery.com