From: Palmer Dabbelt <palmerdabbelt@google.com>
To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Cc: Jim Wilson <jimw@sifive.com>,
bmeng.cn@gmail.com, Andrew Waterman <andrew@sifive.com>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmerdabbelt@google.com>
Subject: [PATCH] RISC-V: Implement __clear_cache via __builtin__clear_cache
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2021 21:56:46 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210430045646.1508805-1-palmerdabbelt@google.com> (raw)
We have had an implementation of __builtin__clear_cache since the
beginning, but didn't have the cooresponding __clear_cache library
routine implemented. This directly conflicts the GCC manual in a
handful of places, which indicates that __clear_cache should work and
that __builtin_clear_cache should function the same way as
__clear_cache by ethier calling it or inlining the functionality.
This patch simply implements __clear_cache via __builtin__clear_cache.
This should be safe as we always have clear_cache insn so therefor
__builtin__clear_cache will never fall back to calling __clear_cache.
I'm not actually sure that silently implementing clear_cache as a NOP
when there is no ISA defined mechanism for icache synchronization is the
right way to go, but that's really a different discussion.
This was reported as Bug 94136, which is a year old but was categorized
as a documentation bug. I believe that categorization was incorrect:
having an empty __clear_cache library routine is simply incorrect
behavior, the fact that __builtin__clear_cache happens to be implemented
as a libc call on Linux is just a red herring suggesting the
documentation fix to point out the name difference. I view this new
behavior as conforming to the existing documentation: we're just
inlining the __clear_cache implementation, even if that implementation
happens to be a call to a very similar looking libc routine.
gcc/ChangeLog
PR target/94136
* config/riscv/riscv.h (CLEAR_INSN_CACHE): New macro.
---
Something has gone off the rails with my laptop and it's failing to
build GCC, so I haven't actually tested this. I'm not sure it's sane to
call a GCC builtin from within libgcc, but I figured it would be best to
just send out the patch to ask.
---
gcc/config/riscv/riscv.h | 5 +++++
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
diff --git a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.h b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.h
index f3e85723c85..39a688ea1e9 100644
--- a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.h
+++ b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.h
@@ -993,4 +993,9 @@ extern void riscv_remove_unneeded_save_restore_calls (void);
#define HARD_REGNO_RENAME_OK(FROM, TO) riscv_hard_regno_rename_ok (FROM, TO)
+/* We always have a "clear_cache" insn, which means __builtin__clear_cache will
+ never emit a call to __clear_cache. */
+#undef CLEAR_INSN_CACHE
+#define CLEAR_INSN_CACHE(BEG, END) __builtin__clear_cache((BEG), (END));
+
#endif /* ! GCC_RISCV_H */
--
2.31.1.527.g47e6f16901-goog
next reply other threads:[~2021-04-30 5:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-04-30 4:56 Palmer Dabbelt [this message]
2021-05-01 5:23 ` Jim Wilson
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20210430045646.1508805-1-palmerdabbelt@google.com \
--to=palmerdabbelt@google.com \
--cc=andrew@sifive.com \
--cc=bmeng.cn@gmail.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=jimw@sifive.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).