From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-lf1-x130.google.com (mail-lf1-x130.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::130]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 112AB385840E for ; Fri, 8 Oct 2021 01:49:43 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 112AB385840E Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=sifive.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sifive.com Received: by mail-lf1-x130.google.com with SMTP id b20so33098857lfv.3 for ; Thu, 07 Oct 2021 18:49:43 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sifive.com; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=z2ERb8nPrbNB1cvB+C6TCZSVycVq9wLLGWNsO09TxHA=; b=IEL/1eJXBiSAv9jMLpvQtkoakdSYrgHRPNH3aqThD0voTTsAwJDC9rB/pJprN54s0k jcMLF6dBioLGO6WP5ya8gJ8BtT1e1dYcUoRktPCa77aGyHNp76hZKezM7E4WinLUjG1D 6gep9ueTZylq62aiRUrrYLfDDIKeV5c8VvmV01A7Nj+p6xtKOQnNI20Eglwy5HoNJHUV OnjuRzq81wri7UzHNDmfxnB3EUCfxyUcRAAENZ0Gmd26Z5DmXLaSbh2PkQPOdOZrJqLo e3zvr7M90kPzq0NopPZhnzCJPUNk0b73+tyui7RsUzmqMe1liIVap07ckVHB91E2T30D mjnQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=z2ERb8nPrbNB1cvB+C6TCZSVycVq9wLLGWNsO09TxHA=; b=YksD/i2321HM/dF2DtRcg+pkDfmNJVJ8KeXif7nf24NVtes2c5dkwlPrzQwMoQEJg0 ddvHw+DA7DLtrv6hx1fK/zUI3Qe9S6yTiSUi65wBK6z8X0GDT23oFlVK2I/bT0MP9aom fAhTa13TeSoLPWUuiPx7EjL/5psD/1YOYdJWKzcqdG4/0xTWz8+BgQrS/MUT+Uc9HHrN 3DyOtAKUTBWtNNlFkmlGW0RAUFDp3IQK5J/H5iHWx63C1z7ZT9F2dz2p6S+nE/Eg8twA 2HyM9o3WqAonklYzO+nWiYjJ87KmlJSR5icvKI/peEDYIyNXJsoXx8XumnaeydYl3EXz 22+A== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533RZPzUn83wWEE8tAivOwgzU6cjswcbh32lG09muOArtuJBaZah b4bxVtNmP+SMvx2gc8R9fOVgzxszGg4P5SdaDP0Bpw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwIJ1n7yp5Y7H5sDccDFaIbiyiOUSCmgtpSJ6qgjIGzgx2ELssYIvKXQTlC9/XepKhh8ytapn7uCTipoPCLElQ= X-Received: by 2002:a19:8c05:: with SMTP id o5mr7193022lfd.162.1633657780904; Thu, 07 Oct 2021 18:49:40 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20211007090727.11204-1-kito.cheng@sifive.com> In-Reply-To: From: Kito Cheng Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2021 09:49:29 +0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] [PR/target 100316] Allow constant address for __builtin___clear_cache. To: Andrew Pinski Cc: Kito Cheng , Alexandre Oliva , christophm30@gmail.com, GCC Patches Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gcc-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2021 01:49:44 -0000 Hi Andrew: > The error message would have been emitted from > expand_builtin___clear_cache and maybe_emit_call_builtin___clear_cache > would not have been called from user code. > All other uses of maybe_emit_call_builtin___clear_cache are internal > to gcc and should have the correct mode so asserting is the right > thing to do. I got your point, and agree that, just like when we feed double types, such type error should already catched by other place :)