[PATCH, ARM] attribute target (thumb,arm) [0/6]

[PATCH, ARM] attribute target (thumb,arm) [0/6]

[Christian Bruel]

Hello Ramana,

Here is the attribute revisited after your comments, so

  - thumb1 is now supported
  - -mflip-thump option added for testing.
  - inlining is allowed between modes.

This set of patches was tested on rev#217709 as:

no regressions with:
     arm-sim/
     arm-sim/-march=armv7-a
     arm-sim/-mthumb
     arm-sim/-mthumb/-march=armv7-a

a few artifacts, all of them analyzed, with
     arm-sim/-mflip-thumb/
     arm-sim/-mflip-thumb//-march=armv7-a
     arm-sim/-mflip-thumb//-mthumb
     arm-sim/-mflip-thumb//-mthumb/-march=armv7-a


Artifacts are analyzed, they are mostly the fault of the testsuite being 
unable to mix modes in the expected results (e.g thumb[1,2] or arm tests 
predicates, mix setjmp/longjump between modes...)

The support is split as followed:

[1/6] Reorganized arm_option_override to dynamically redefine the flags 
depending on the attribute mode.

[2/6] Reorganized macro settings to be set/unset for each #pragma targets

[3/6] Change ARM_DECLARE_FUNCTION_NAME into a function

[4/6] Implement hooks to support attribute target

[5/6] Implement #pragma target

[6/6] Add -mflip-thumb option for testing

I think I missed the stage3, Anyway would it be OK for stage1 when it 
reopens ?

Christian

Re: [PATCH, ARM] attribute target (thumb,arm) [0/6]

[Ramana Radhakrishnan]

On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 1:24 PM, Christian Bruel <christian.bruel@st.com> wrote:

> I think I missed the stage3, Anyway would it be OK for stage1 when it
> reopens ?

Since you submitted this well during stage1 and given that these
patches address comments from earlier in the review process we should
aim to get these in for 5.0. If at some point during the review
process it looks risky and there needs to be significant rework we can
always stop. It's on the list of patches to be reviewed and I will
find some dedicated time later this week to set down and review / play
with the patches in an attempt to move this forward as it is a
reasonably large chunk of work.

Thanks for continuing to work on these patches and addressing the
earlier review comments.

regards
Ramana

>
> Christian
>

Re: [PATCH, ARM] attribute target (thumb,arm) [0/6]

[Christian Bruel]

On 11/19/2014 03:18 PM, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 1:24 PM, Christian Bruel <christian.bruel@st.com> wrote:
>
>> I think I missed the stage3, Anyway would it be OK for stage1 when it
>> reopens ?
>
> Since you submitted this well during stage1 and given that these
> patches address comments from earlier in the review process we should
> aim to get these in for 5.0. If at some point during the review
> process it looks risky and there needs to be significant rework we can
> always stop. It's on the list of patches to be reviewed and I will
> find some dedicated time later this week to set down and review / play
> with the patches in an attempt to move this forward as it is a
> reasonably large chunk of work.

Thanks, also I forgot to mention that you need
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-10/msg01231.html
to play with the attribute. Will be part of the same shot.

Christian

>
> Thanks for continuing to work on these patches and addressing the
> earlier review comments.
>
> regards
> Ramana
>
>>
>> Christian
>>

Re: [PATCH, ARM] attribute target (thumb,arm) [0/6]

[Ramana Radhakrishnan]

On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 2:54 PM, Christian Bruel <christian.bruel@st.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 11/19/2014 03:18 PM, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 1:24 PM, Christian Bruel <christian.bruel@st.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I think I missed the stage3, Anyway would it be OK for stage1 when it
>>> reopens ?
>>
>>
>> Since you submitted this well during stage1 and given that these
>> patches address comments from earlier in the review process we should
>> aim to get these in for 5.0. If at some point during the review
>> process it looks risky and there needs to be significant rework we can
>> always stop. It's on the list of patches to be reviewed and I will
>> find some dedicated time later this week to set down and review / play
>> with the patches in an attempt to move this forward as it is a
>> reasonably large chunk of work.
>
>
> Thanks, also I forgot to mention that you need
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-10/msg01231.html
> to play with the attribute. Will be part of the same shot.

Isn't that Ok'd for committing ? Why then isn't it applied ?

Ramana

>
> Christian
>
>
>>
>> Thanks for continuing to work on these patches and addressing the
>> earlier review comments.
>>
>> regards
>> Ramana
>>
>>>
>>> Christian
>>>
>

Re: [PATCH, ARM] attribute target (thumb,arm) [0/6]

[Christian Bruel]

Hi Ramana,

On 11/27/2014 11:36 AM, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 2:54 PM, Christian Bruel <christian.bruel@st.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 11/19/2014 03:18 PM, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 1:24 PM, Christian Bruel <christian.bruel@st.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I think I missed the stage3, Anyway would it be OK for stage1 when it
>>>> reopens ?
>>>
>>>
>>> Since you submitted this well during stage1 and given that these
>>> patches address comments from earlier in the review process we should
>>> aim to get these in for 5.0. If at some point during the review
>>> process it looks risky and there needs to be significant rework we can
>>> always stop. It's on the list of patches to be reviewed and I will
>>> find some dedicated time later this week to set down and review / play
>>> with the patches in an attempt to move this forward as it is a
>>> reasonably large chunk of work.
>>
>>
>> Thanks, also I forgot to mention that you need
>> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-10/msg01231.html
>> to play with the attribute. Will be part of the same shot.
>
> Isn't that Ok'd for committing ? Why then isn't it applied ?


yes it was, it is in my single changeset with the attribute target since 
itÅ› the only way to trigger the issue.

Cheers

Christian



>
> Ramana
>
>>
>> Christian
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks for continuing to work on these patches and addressing the
>>> earlier review comments.
>>>
>>> regards
>>> Ramana
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Christian
>>>>
>>