From: Thomas Preudhomme <thomas.preudhomme@foss.arm.com>
To: Ramana Radhakrishnan <ramana.gcc@googlemail.com>
Cc: Kyrill Tkachov <kyrylo.tkachov@arm.com>,
Ramana Radhakrishnan <ramana.radhakrishnan@arm.com>,
Richard Earnshaw <richard.earnshaw@arm.com>,
"gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org" <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH, GCC/ARM, gcc-5-branch] Fix PR80082: LDRD erronously used for 64bit load on ARMv7-R
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2017 12:12:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <66eefa85-d2c0-4b74-fd01-db137502e61a@foss.arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJA7tRYXFPxw+356bUrxdPBP0nvZp_bPAmyGVU65eitbOhCZfw@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2621 bytes --]
Hi,
Currently GCC is happy to use LDRD to perform a 64bit load on ARMv7-R,
as shown by the testcase on this patch. However, LDRD is only atomic
when LPAE extensions is available, which they are not for ARMv7-R. This
commit solve the issue by introducing a new feature bit to distinguish
LPAE extensions instead of deducing it from div instruction
availability.
ChangeLog entries are as follow:
*** gcc/ChangeLog ***
2017-03-22 Thomas Preud'homme <thomas.preudhomme@arm.com>
PR target/80082
* config/arm/arm-protos.h (FL_LPAE): Define macro.
(FL_FOR_ARCH7VE): Add FL_LPAE.
(arm_arch_lpae): Declare extern.
* config/arm/arm.c (arm_arch_lpae): Declare.
(arm_option_override): Define arm_arch_lpae.
* config/arm/arm.h (TARGET_HAVE_LPAE): Redefine in term of
arm_arch_lpae.
*** gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog ***
2017-03-22 Thomas Preud'homme <thomas.preudhomme@arm.com>
PR target/80082
* gcc.target/arm/atomic_loaddi_10.c: New testcase.
* gcc.target/arm/atomic_loaddi_11.c: Likewise.
Is this ok for gcc-5-branch?
Best regards,
Thomas
On 06/04/17 14:05, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 12:15 PM, Thomas Preudhomme
> <thomas.preudhomme@foss.arm.com> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Currently GCC is happy to use LDRD to perform a 64bit load on ARMv7-R,
>> as shown by the testcase on this patch. However, LDRD is only atomic
>> when LPAE extensions is available, which they are not for ARMv7-R. This
>> commit solve the issue by introducing a new feature bit to distinguish
>> LPAE extensions instead of deducing it from div instruction
>> availability.
>
>
> Ok but with the testsuite fix that I just approved, please also fix
> in gcc-5 branch.
>
> Thanks,
> Ramana
>
>>
>> ChangeLog entries are as follow:
>>
>> *** gcc/ChangeLog ***
>>
>> 2017-03-22 Thomas Preud'homme <thomas.preudhomme@arm.com>
>>
>> PR target/80082
>> * config/arm/arm-protos.h (FL_LPAE): Define macro.
>> (FL_FOR_ARCH7VE): Add FL_LPAE.
>> (arm_arch_lpae): Declare extern.
>> * config/arm/arm.c (arm_arch_lpae): Declare.
>> (arm_option_override): Define arm_arch_lpae.
>> * config/arm/arm.h (TARGET_HAVE_LPAE): Redefine in term of
>> arm_arch_lpae.
>>
>> *** gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog ***
>>
>> 2017-03-22 Thomas Preud'homme <thomas.preudhomme@arm.com>
>>
>> PR target/80082
>> * gcc.target/arm/atomic_loaddi_10.c: New testcase.
>> * gcc.target/arm/atomic_loaddi_11.c: Likewise.
>>
>>
>> Testing: bootstrapped for -march=armv7ve and testsuite shows no regression.
>>
>> Is this ok for gcc-6-branch?
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Thomas
[-- Attachment #2: atomic_loaddi_11_cortexr5_gcc5.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 4523 bytes --]
diff --git a/gcc/config/arm/arm-protos.h b/gcc/config/arm/arm-protos.h
index ebaf746227723f68c4c1cda89ba35c598a3ae4ba..21df391789d3d9f7b1d28e2bb2f99458843d0c3e 100644
--- a/gcc/config/arm/arm-protos.h
+++ b/gcc/config/arm/arm-protos.h
@@ -343,7 +343,7 @@ extern bool arm_is_constant_pool_ref (rtx);
#define FL_STRONG (1 << 8) /* StrongARM */
#define FL_ARCH5E (1 << 9) /* DSP extensions to v5 */
#define FL_XSCALE (1 << 10) /* XScale */
-/* spare (1 << 11) */
+#define FL_LPAE (1 << 11) /* ARMv7-A LPAE. */
#define FL_ARCH6 (1 << 12) /* Architecture rel 6. Adds
media instructions. */
#define FL_VFPV2 (1 << 13) /* Vector Floating Point V2. */
@@ -392,7 +392,7 @@ extern bool arm_is_constant_pool_ref (rtx);
#define FL_FOR_ARCH6M (FL_FOR_ARCH6 & ~FL_NOTM)
#define FL_FOR_ARCH7 ((FL_FOR_ARCH6T2 & ~FL_NOTM) | FL_ARCH7)
#define FL_FOR_ARCH7A (FL_FOR_ARCH7 | FL_NOTM | FL_ARCH6K)
-#define FL_FOR_ARCH7VE (FL_FOR_ARCH7A | FL_THUMB_DIV | FL_ARM_DIV)
+#define FL_FOR_ARCH7VE (FL_FOR_ARCH7A | FL_THUMB_DIV | FL_ARM_DIV | FL_LPAE)
#define FL_FOR_ARCH7R (FL_FOR_ARCH7A | FL_THUMB_DIV)
#define FL_FOR_ARCH7M (FL_FOR_ARCH7 | FL_THUMB_DIV)
#define FL_FOR_ARCH7EM (FL_FOR_ARCH7M | FL_ARCH7EM)
@@ -487,6 +487,9 @@ extern int arm_arch_thumb2;
extern int arm_arch_arm_hwdiv;
extern int arm_arch_thumb_hwdiv;
+/* Nonzero if this chip supports the Large Physical Address Extension. */
+extern int arm_arch_lpae;
+
/* Nonzero if chip disallows volatile memory access in IT block. */
extern int arm_arch_no_volatile_ce;
diff --git a/gcc/config/arm/arm.h b/gcc/config/arm/arm.h
index 5561e433b2929df311aec3263033c14b366836d3..4baf3e454b293c765c98948d86b23024ef84982d 100644
--- a/gcc/config/arm/arm.h
+++ b/gcc/config/arm/arm.h
@@ -370,8 +370,7 @@ extern void (*arm_lang_output_object_attributes_hook)(void);
#define TARGET_HAVE_LDREX ((arm_arch6 && TARGET_ARM) || arm_arch7)
/* Nonzero if this chip supports LPAE. */
-#define TARGET_HAVE_LPAE \
- (arm_arch7 && ((insn_flags & FL_FOR_ARCH7VE) == FL_FOR_ARCH7VE))
+#define TARGET_HAVE_LPAE (arm_arch_lpae)
/* Nonzero if this chip supports ldrex{bh} and strex{bh}. */
#define TARGET_HAVE_LDREXBH ((arm_arch6k && TARGET_ARM) || arm_arch7)
diff --git a/gcc/config/arm/arm.c b/gcc/config/arm/arm.c
index 6f9518995a387c84cd53deaa5ae6bac465d81ee8..c8aab8e09f83efd084a9d21e0d2fd04c04120877 100644
--- a/gcc/config/arm/arm.c
+++ b/gcc/config/arm/arm.c
@@ -866,6 +866,9 @@ int arm_arch_thumb2;
int arm_arch_arm_hwdiv;
int arm_arch_thumb_hwdiv;
+/* Nonzero if this chip supports the Large Physical Address Extension. */
+int arm_arch_lpae;
+
/* Nonzero if chip disallows volatile memory access in IT block. */
int arm_arch_no_volatile_ce;
@@ -2862,6 +2865,7 @@ arm_option_override (void)
arm_arch_iwmmxt2 = (insn_flags & FL_IWMMXT2) != 0;
arm_arch_thumb_hwdiv = (insn_flags & FL_THUMB_DIV) != 0;
arm_arch_arm_hwdiv = (insn_flags & FL_ARM_DIV) != 0;
+ arm_arch_lpae = (insn_flags & FL_LPAE) != 0;
arm_arch_no_volatile_ce = (insn_flags & FL_NO_VOLATILE_CE) != 0;
arm_tune_cortex_a9 = (arm_tune == cortexa9) != 0;
arm_arch_crc = (insn_flags & FL_CRC32) != 0;
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/atomic_loaddi_10.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/atomic_loaddi_10.c
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..ecc3d06d0c9f5966daa3ce7e2d52e09d14e0cbc8
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/atomic_loaddi_10.c
@@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
+/* { dg-do compile } */
+/* { dg-require-effective-target arm_arch_v7ve_ok } */
+/* { dg-options "-O2" } */
+/* { dg-add-options arm_arch_v7ve } */
+
+#include <stdatomic.h>
+
+atomic_llong x = 0;
+
+atomic_llong get_x()
+{
+ return atomic_load(&x);
+}
+
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler "ldrd" } } */
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/atomic_loaddi_11.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/atomic_loaddi_11.c
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..85c64ae68b1b1ee68466809f7f83d07ceabec575
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/atomic_loaddi_11.c
@@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
+/* { dg-do compile } */
+/* { dg-require-effective-target arm_arch_v7r_ok } */
+/* { dg-skip-if "do not override -mcpu" { *-*-* } { "-mcpu=*" "-march=*" } { "-mcpu=cortex-r5" } } */
+/* { dg-options "-O2 -mcpu=cortex-r5" } */
+
+#include <stdatomic.h>
+
+atomic_llong x = 0;
+
+atomic_llong get_x()
+{
+ return atomic_load(&x);
+}
+
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "ldrd" } } */
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-04-10 12:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-03-27 11:15 [PATCH, GCC/ARM, gcc-6-branch] " Thomas Preudhomme
2017-03-30 10:55 ` Thomas Preudhomme
2017-04-04 17:01 ` [PATCH, GCC/ARM, gcc-6-branch, ping2] " Thomas Preudhomme
2017-04-06 13:05 ` [PATCH, GCC/ARM, gcc-6-branch] " Ramana Radhakrishnan
2017-04-06 16:38 ` Thomas Preudhomme
2017-04-10 12:12 ` Thomas Preudhomme [this message]
2017-04-11 14:47 ` [PATCH, GCC/ARM, gcc-5-branch] " Ramana Radhakrishnan
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=66eefa85-d2c0-4b74-fd01-db137502e61a@foss.arm.com \
--to=thomas.preudhomme@foss.arm.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=kyrylo.tkachov@arm.com \
--cc=ramana.gcc@googlemail.com \
--cc=ramana.radhakrishnan@arm.com \
--cc=richard.earnshaw@arm.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).