public inbox for gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Xi Ruoyao <xry111@xry111.site>
To: Lulu Cheng <chenglulu@loongson.cn>, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Cc: i@xen0n.name, xuchenghua@loongson.cn
Subject: Re: [PATCH] LoongArch: Fix the problem of structure parameter passing in C++. This structure has empty structure members and less than three floating point members.
Date: Wed, 24 May 2023 14:45:07 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <2d33bf204b0d59f16df8714123ee812be5754617.camel@xry111.site> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230524060407.19181-1-chenglulu@loongson.cn>

On Wed, 2023-05-24 at 14:04 +0800, Lulu Cheng wrote:
> An empty struct type that is not non-trivial for the purposes of calls
> will be treated as though it were the following C type:
> 
> struct {
>   char c;
> };
> 
> Before this patch was added, a structure parameter containing an empty structure and
> less than three floating-point members was passed through one or two floating-point
> registers, while nested empty structures are ignored. Which did not conform to the
> calling convention.

No, it's a deliberate decision I've made in
https://gcc.gnu.org/r12-8294.  And we already agreed "the ABI needs to
be updated" when we applied r12-8294, but I've never improved my English
skill to revise the ABI myself :(.

We are also using the same "de-facto" ABI throwing away the empty struct
for Clang++ (https://reviews.llvm.org/D132285).  So we should update the
spec here, instead of changing every implementation.

The C++ standard treats the empty struct as size 1 for ensuring the
semantics of pointer comparison operations.  When we pass it through the
registers, there is no need to really consider the empty field because
there is no pointers to registers.

-- 
Xi Ruoyao <xry111@xry111.site>
School of Aerospace Science and Technology, Xidian University

  reply	other threads:[~2023-05-24  6:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-05-24  6:04 Lulu Cheng
2023-05-24  6:45 ` Xi Ruoyao [this message]
2023-05-24  8:41   ` Xi Ruoyao
2023-05-24  8:59     ` Jonathan Wakely
2023-05-24 20:15       ` Jason Merrill
2023-05-25  2:46         ` Lulu Cheng
2023-05-25  2:52           ` WANG Xuerui
2023-05-25  3:41             ` Lulu Cheng
2023-05-25  8:23         ` Jonathan Wakely
2023-05-24  8:47   ` Lulu Cheng
2023-05-24  9:25     ` Xi Ruoyao
2023-05-24 10:07       ` Lulu Cheng
2023-05-24 14:55         ` Xi Ruoyao

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=2d33bf204b0d59f16df8714123ee812be5754617.camel@xry111.site \
    --to=xry111@xry111.site \
    --cc=chenglulu@loongson.cn \
    --cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=i@xen0n.name \
    --cc=xuchenghua@loongson.cn \
    /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).