From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 88360 invoked by alias); 2 Sep 2016 12:12:06 -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 88348 invoked by uid 89); 2 Sep 2016 12:12:06 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy= X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Fri, 02 Sep 2016 12:12:05 +0000 Received: from int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.24]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1DEF661E46; Fri, 2 Sep 2016 12:12:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (ovpn-204-43.brq.redhat.com [10.40.204.43]) by int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id u82CC1Cr011289 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 2 Sep 2016 08:12:02 -0400 Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id u82CBx0k005162; Fri, 2 Sep 2016 14:12:00 +0200 Received: (from jakub@localhost) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id u82CBvKa005161; Fri, 2 Sep 2016 14:11:57 +0200 Date: Fri, 02 Sep 2016 12:12:00 -0000 From: Jakub Jelinek To: Joseph Myers Cc: Uros Bizjak , "gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org" , Richard Henderson Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH, alpha]: ABI change: pass SFmode and SCmode variable arguments by reference Message-ID: <20160902121157.GA14857@tucnak.redhat.com> Reply-To: Jakub Jelinek References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2016-09/txt/msg00079.txt.bz2 On Fri, Sep 02, 2016 at 12:09:30PM +0000, Joseph Myers wrote: > On Fri, 2 Sep 2016, Uros Bizjak wrote: > > > argument. Passing _Complex float as a variable argument never > > worked on alpha. Thus, we have no backward compatibility issues > > Presumably there should be an architecture-independent execution test of > passing _Complex float in variable arguments - either new, or a > pre-existing one whose XFAIL or skip for alpha can be removed. (That is, > one in the GCC testsuite rather than relying on a libffi test to test > GCC.) And if it is in g*.dg/compat/, it can even test ABI compatibility between different compilers or their versions. Jakub