From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.158.5]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CA0543857C71 for ; Thu, 29 Sep 2022 09:12:08 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org CA0543857C71 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.ibm.com Received: from pps.filterd (m0098419.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.17.1.5/8.17.1.5) with ESMTP id 28T7pTwv024775; Thu, 29 Sep 2022 09:12:07 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=message-id : date : mime-version : subject : to : cc : references : from : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding; s=pp1; bh=r4CFAerY1ECyItW5mo3A7ymys/nu1bcmQSvuR9CEk1U=; b=ZrHZKxaFbjGfrUYZxALAQ+5qx8KTmQaw4bYEId+x/C1fkmsut5qJhEKfemxozID5orn6 5Av6O+b1LMd5R5KGGhFosDwRfeQfc17cwxc7OaTiPDKMPr/xZSXapUIwGcf/KZamSTwR nF15S4p2CtwPsN5mdLpewEqch1kWaJpbKgbr7RMRTM0Lb00CfaP3Rw+gYWvM+xAOIoUo 1HaGzGMMZ+wqYvFQpH5sEYPhNX6zycfLDGtgUoPKhWZ26EblNi9NX7AlgndBQGuYAE9/ F2xf1VjU3xDNtcGyO5VdmPJ8g36mso6tVMgwyuafpVwAbGtnQQx1vfY20dZX9pLmZmzN IQ== Received: from ppma04fra.de.ibm.com (6a.4a.5195.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [149.81.74.106]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3jw59u608m-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 29 Sep 2022 09:12:07 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma04fra.de.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma04fra.de.ibm.com (8.16.1.2/8.16.1.2) with SMTP id 28T95ttp015489; Thu, 29 Sep 2022 09:12:05 GMT Received: from b06cxnps3074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06relay09.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.109.194]) by ppma04fra.de.ibm.com with ESMTP id 3jssh94u1y-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 29 Sep 2022 09:12:05 +0000 Received: from b06wcsmtp001.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (b06wcsmtp001.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.160]) by b06cxnps3074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 28T9C32h66388442 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 29 Sep 2022 09:12:03 GMT Received: from b06wcsmtp001.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15368A4062; Thu, 29 Sep 2022 09:12:03 +0000 (GMT) Received: from b06wcsmtp001.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECE17A4054; Thu, 29 Sep 2022 09:12:01 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [9.197.253.23] (unknown [9.197.253.23]) by b06wcsmtp001.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Thu, 29 Sep 2022 09:12:01 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <826f30b1-a3fe-4227-1874-5e4f5a1f6d56@linux.ibm.com> Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2022 17:12:00 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.6.1 Subject: Re: [PATCH] rs6000: Rework option -mpowerpc64 handling [PR106680] Content-Language: en-US To: Iain Sandoe Cc: GCC Patches , Segher Boessenkool References: <9d9f1f43-b528-387d-45a7-1d89400de0fc@linux.ibm.com> <5B4DCBBB-3237-4A9F-ACCA-6669DE6905B8@sandoe.co.uk> <92415AC8-4A5A-4119-BFCC-D7C66472F961@sandoe.co.uk> <5e64fed0-7e79-3d60-da62-5c2bf3e2c707@linux.ibm.com> <75315B0E-9812-4726-A7FA-57762A2E47B7@sandoe.co.uk> From: "Kewen.Lin" In-Reply-To: <75315B0E-9812-4726-A7FA-57762A2E47B7@sandoe.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-GUID: 3lHtRgFn_qCrF7vbdrXg9lWf-_IQLKmq X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: 3lHtRgFn_qCrF7vbdrXg9lWf-_IQLKmq X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.205,Aquarius:18.0.895,Hydra:6.0.528,FMLib:17.11.122.1 definitions=2022-09-29_04,2022-09-29_02,2022-06-22_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 clxscore=1015 mlxscore=0 phishscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 priorityscore=1501 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2209130000 definitions=main-2209290054 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_EF,NICE_REPLY_A,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: Hi Iain, Thanks again for your help!! on 2022/9/29 16:16, Iain Sandoe wrote: > Hi Kewen, > > thanks for looking at this! > (I suspect it would also affect a 32b linux host with a 64b multilib) > Quite reasonable suspicion. > quite likely powerpc-darwin is the only 32b ppc host in regular testing. > [...snip...] >> >> I'm testing the attached diff which can be applied on top of the previous proposed patch >> on ppc64 and ppc64le, could you help to test it can fix the issue? > > It does work on a cross from x86_64-darwin => powerpc-darwin, I can also do compile-only > tests there with a dummy board and the new tests pass with one minor tweak as described > below. > Nice! How blind I was, I should have searched for "requires.*PowerPC64". > full regstrap on the G5 will take a day or so .. but I’ll do the C target tests first to get a heads up. > Thanks! I think the C target tests is enough for now. I just refined the patch by addressing Segher's review comments and some other adjustments, I'm going to test it on ppc64/ppc64le/aix first, if everything goes well, I'll ask your help for a full regstrap on the new version. > ==== > > OK. So one small wrinkle, > > Darwin already has > > if (TARGET_64BIT && ! TARGET_POWERPC64) > { > rs6000_isa_flags |= OPTION_MASK_POWERPC64; > warning (0, "%qs requires PowerPC64 architecture, enabling", "-m64"); > } > > in darwin_rs6000_override_options() > > Which means that we do not report an error, but a warning, and then we force 64b on (taking > the user’s intention to be specified by the explicit ‘-m64’). > > If there’s a strong feeling that this should really be an error, then I could make that change and > see what fallout results. IMHO it's fine to leave it unchanged, aix also follows the same idea emitting warning instead of error, there are probably some actual user cases relying on this behavior, changing it can affect them. Thanks for bringing this up anyway! > > the patch below amends the test expectations to include Darwin with the warning it currently > reports. Will incorporate! Thanks agian! BR, Kewen