From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-patches-return-391706-listarch-gcc-patches=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 13644 invoked by alias); 11 Feb 2015 14:20:58 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-patches.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 13625 invoked by uid 89); 11 Feb 2015 14:20:57 -0000
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found: No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=0.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,KAM_FROM_URIBL_PCCC,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.2
X-HELO: mail-ob0-f171.google.com
Received: from mail-ob0-f171.google.com (HELO mail-ob0-f171.google.com) (209.85.214.171) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-GCM-SHA256 encrypted) ESMTPS; Wed, 11 Feb 2015 14:20:55 +0000
Received: by mail-ob0-f171.google.com with SMTP id gq1so3444863obb.2        for <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>; Wed, 11 Feb 2015 06:20:53 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.202.107.195 with SMTP id g186mr18420447oic.67.1423664453801; Wed, 11 Feb 2015 06:20:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.76.134.102 with HTTP; Wed, 11 Feb 2015 06:20:53 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <yddtwyssfm8.fsf@lokon.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE>
References: <20150111235837.GA26961@gmail.com>	<54B42880.2040800@redhat.com>	<CAMe9rOq4mS7MtgrfLAKg2htp99rbZVcY8enGGiVSU5c9xG+3eQ@mail.gmail.com>	<2219602.BYtQkL3Scp@laptop1.gw.ume.nu>	<54B444E4.1080700@redhat.com>	<20150113125201.GA18558@gmail.com>	<54B570D5.4040008@redhat.com>	<yddk2zp1hx7.fsf@CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE>	<CAMe9rOqXyp6rLQhGgsxhxWr21j-e-xAfGXATi8Z1C+cp9tW=mA@mail.gmail.com>	<yddtwyssfm8.fsf@lokon.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE>
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2015 14:20:00 -0000
Message-ID: <CAMe9rOqQ6W7zsLL5v=YkvDc6rF4Ld6ejDW4Ce7=ciM_VHuxezA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [testsuite] PATCH: Add check_effective_target_pie
From: "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>
To: Rainer Orth <ro@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de>
Cc: Jeff Law <law@redhat.com>, Magnus Granberg <zorry@gentoo.org>, 	GCC Patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-IsSubscribed: yes
X-SW-Source: 2015-02/txt/msg00709.txt.bz2

On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 6:10 AM, Rainer Orth
<ro@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de> wrote:
> "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com> writes:
>
>>> The new proc is bogus, unfortunately: there's already an existing
>>> check_effective_target_pie that checks if a target can support PIE.  The
>>> new one just overrides the previous one.  On targets supporting PIE
>>> (like Darwin), but not defaulting to it, the PIE tests suddenly turn out
>>> UNSUPPORTED.
>>>
>>> You should rename the new one to
>>> e.g. check_effective_target_pie_default, update the single user, and
>>> document it in sourcebuild.texi.
>>
>> I checked in this as an obvious fix.
>
> I think pie_enabled is not a very descriptive name:
>
> Index: doc/sourcebuild.texi
> ===================================================================
> --- doc/sourcebuild.texi (revision 220617)
> +++ doc/sourcebuild.texi (working copy)
> @@ -1884,6 +1884,9 @@
>  @item nonpic
>  Target does not generate PIC by default.
>
> +@item pie_enabled
> +Target generates PIE by default.
> +
>  @item pcc_bitfield_type_matters
>  Target defines @code{PCC_BITFIELD_TYPE_MATTERS}.
>
> With -fpie, PIE is also enabled, just not the default without any

I was testing

# make RUNTESTFLAGS="--target_board='unix{-m32\ -fpie,-fpie}'

I don't consider PIE is default.  It is just enabled.

> options.  Please either go with the pie_default I sugested or wait for
> others to weigh in before rushing in another `obvious' fix.
>



-- 
H.J.