From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 121970 invoked by alias); 16 Feb 2018 15:27:44 -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 121938 invoked by uid 89); 16 Feb 2018 15:27:43 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-11.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,GIT_PATCH_2,GIT_PATCH_3,KAM_SHORT,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy= X-Spam-User: qpsmtpd, 5 recipients X-HELO: gate.crashing.org Received: from gate.crashing.org (HELO gate.crashing.org) (63.228.1.57) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Fri, 16 Feb 2018 15:27:40 +0000 Received: from gate.crashing.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by gate.crashing.org (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id w1GFRbTM011454; Fri, 16 Feb 2018 09:27:37 -0600 Received: (from segher@localhost) by gate.crashing.org (8.14.1/8.14.1/Submit) id w1GFRak6011449; Fri, 16 Feb 2018 09:27:36 -0600 Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2018 15:27:00 -0000 From: Segher Boessenkool To: Yury Gribov Cc: GCC Patches , seurer@gcc.gnu.org, wschmidt@gcc.gnu.org, meissner@gcc.gnu.org, marxin Subject: Re: [PATCHv2][PR target/81535] Fix tests on Power Message-ID: <20180216152736.GL21977@gate.crashing.org> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2018-02/txt/msg00993.txt.bz2 Hi Yuri, On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 08:13:38PM +0000, Yury Gribov wrote: > This is an updated version of patch for PR 81535. The patch was last > discussed in November. The new version addresses Segher's comments in > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-08/msg00558.html > FTR here's an excerpt from > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-11/msg02231.html which > explains the reasoning behind PR 56727 (which introduced regression in > PR 81535): > > >> Is it correct that current GCC does not do the call via the PLT? > > > > Well, it was decided in > > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56727 that it would be a > > valid optimization because the only way to expose the difference would > > be through dlsym hackery. Note that original PowerPC use-case > > (reported in https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21116) > > would benefit from this optimization as because PLT call + indirection > > would be replaced by normal PC-relative call. Yup. > From 68ef3663aed0bb6f33c0c14e98544f7f7b797469 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Yury Gribov > Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2018 07:48:57 +0000 > Subject: [PATCH] Updated PowerPC tests. > > gcc/testsuite/ > > 2018-02-15 Yury Gribov > > PR target/81535 > * gcc.dg/pr56727-1.c: Prevent tailcalls and update for powerpc*-*-*. > * gcc.dg/pr56727-2.c: Ditto. > * gcc.target/powerpc/pr79439.c: Renamed to... > * gcc.target/powerpc/pr79439-1.c: ...this. > * gcc.target/powerpc/pr79439-2.c: New test. > * gcc.target/powerpc/pr79439-3.c: New test. > --- /dev/null > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr79439-1.c > @@ -0,0 +1,28 @@ > +/* { dg-do compile { target { powerpc64*-*-linux* && lp64 } } } */ > +/* { dg-options "-O2 -fpic -fno-reorder-blocks" } */ Please do /* { dg-do compile { target { powerpc*-*-linux* && lp64 } } } */ that is, compile on _all_ powerpc, whether the default target of the compiler is 64-bit or not (we only care about the *current* target). Same for the other tests. Okay for trunk with that change. Thanks for working on this! Segher