From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6612 invoked by alias); 17 Feb 2008 10:08:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 6600 invoked by uid 22791); 17 Feb 2008 10:08:02 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Sun, 17 Feb 2008 10:07:34 +0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m1HA7SaL030523; Sun, 17 Feb 2008 05:07:28 -0500 Received: from devserv.devel.redhat.com (devserv.devel.redhat.com [10.10.36.72]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m1HA7Sjl011497; Sun, 17 Feb 2008 05:07:28 -0500 Received: from devserv.devel.redhat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by devserv.devel.redhat.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m1HA7SD6012704; Sun, 17 Feb 2008 05:07:28 -0500 Received: (from jakub@localhost) by devserv.devel.redhat.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/Submit) id m1HA7RcX012702; Sun, 17 Feb 2008 05:07:27 -0500 Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2008 11:57:00 -0000 From: Jakub Jelinek To: Uros Bizjak Cc: Richard Guenther , "Kaveh R. Ghazi" , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, David Edelsohn Subject: Re: [PATCH] Re: Mainline Regression in gcc.target/i386/pr32268.c Message-ID: <20080217100727.GJ24887@devserv.devel.redhat.com> Reply-To: Jakub Jelinek References: <84fc9c000802161030g4fb6553er35d3135c0ca6af9e@mail.gmail.com> <001301c870ce$64e87930$6401a8c0@glap> <84fc9c000802161106y4cc4d99fh72000e7035a47855@mail.gmail.com> <003101c870d0$db0c8b40$6401a8c0@glap> <84fc9c000802161145s452c6e1bo79fe9654ec4f47d9@mail.gmail.com> <47B759A7.7090207@gmail.com> <20080216232915.GI24887@devserv.devel.redhat.com> <47B7E1C7.6080200@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <47B7E1C7.6080200@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-IsSubscribed: yes 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 X-SW-Source: 2008-02/txt/msg00649.txt.bz2 On Sun, Feb 17, 2008 at 08:27:03AM +0100, Uros Bizjak wrote: > Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > >>Please don't. The fix is to change soft-float/soft-fp.h a bit. Jakub, is > >>this change acceptable for glibc? > >> > > > >No. You should IMHO instead > >#define CMPtype int __attribute__ ((mode (__libgcc_cmp_return__))) > >in config/i386/sfp-machine.h. > >There is nothing libc specific on having a default CMPtype definition. > > > > Hm, this won't fly. Ok, you're right. Should have tried that in fn return value :( > But following will: > > typedef int __gcc_CMPtype __attribute__ ((mode (__libgcc_cmp_return__))); > #define CMPtype __gcc_CMPtype So would: typedef int CMPtype __attribute__ ((mode (__libgcc_cmp_return__))); #define CMPtype CMPtype > Attached patch adds this construct to i386/sfp-machine.h and > rs6000/sfp-machine.h. It also changes test as Kaveh suggested. Do we really need to change rs6000 before 4.3 release? AFAIK soft-fp is used there just for 32-bit stuff, and __libgcc_cmp_return__ will be there always int. All I'm saying is that in rs6000 case this isn't a regression bugfix of any kind (and I doubt http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=132350 has been a regression bugfix either). I'd say that's just a cleanup we can do once 4.4 reopens (Monday). Jakub