From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pf1-x430.google.com (mail-pf1-x430.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::430]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 12D473858CDB for ; Fri, 28 Apr 2023 16:51:45 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 12D473858CDB Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Received: by mail-pf1-x430.google.com with SMTP id d2e1a72fcca58-63b5c48ea09so194576b3a.1 for ; Fri, 28 Apr 2023 09:51:45 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20221208; t=1682700704; x=1685292704; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:cc:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=bhREpCQx2PzkKf68SaNqdEw0uZabniBHQD50tEB5FCw=; b=sogaud9ajzDuCJjdUFehmETTpPGTiYqB7WoOB3VPPn+AREHjjficE8gSYMttA7CwfO lAJmTN5vHqvC/1Afj+qRZClcAVdu8JLiI//A6T7sGdUqVrcTSe0Woi3kLqRIQ9xd8uFy SdKPUrRxlEX6pvavtjsYg4QFUQY7OXLAfyqharsWLieUkEyjd4pbO9yR/6R6TV8v7VWM lUVuGU0vrE9eu2/Cnoehx3Z3M3xpO9kP5GIPK0XD0tNhYX65kozrCE7R3ZlqSer/Vipg fUTdGuUZvWgE6goQwheN9QEaqOGawtNyXis0NEu22ZoxZBezcK1oNHnIG1BFgloL0XTp UtHw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1682700704; x=1685292704; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:cc:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=bhREpCQx2PzkKf68SaNqdEw0uZabniBHQD50tEB5FCw=; b=B4gWDxJC6EiuqKivCcqhNegCceBAYob1ZdoyYzgxWW4LRfhfHjkysurFdCrNTEtipm qKBuiX+oTB2kC430mGC2Gq5yau6uHiu/73QFnLHPpoR/zSzwVOjZS+MPm1F4jMVnK0fa mnX1CqMTtAVuMWkacoM2XsDQFzWjijyoghWp7/SkGybFNv3okfnJH+nryklegKjt+VWQ GqJaKARPeuxZkmo3jjCczqR3ihBAtz4BhqLMVbvW79PB7HxL9u1Gh75vERKFcfsL+gDM 2/ANWLmAruq2EVlSiML8bdQ0OUrVmcUoWpOyoJK5o6UXpBAu9wX9Al2E+9FGN5JM5xq2 kT/g== X-Gm-Message-State: AC+VfDwvAUM31GmAmKDK6HPPa8tnJtEW+/w9gLUznlud6Tvu2wTxxSLh lo8nG4N3z55/2/Apa8T6AMU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACHHUZ4qv0SdfTW273/mxNZqjjcKc5Lg/S5BcYZR6awGjrJAzn3VMPBkpx/bilbCKItkEwctXmD8lg== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a00:1415:b0:626:29ed:941f with SMTP id l21-20020a056a00141500b0062629ed941fmr7783206pfu.5.1682700703991; Fri, 28 Apr 2023 09:51:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPV6:2601:681:8600:13d0::99f? ([2601:681:8600:13d0::99f]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id f7-20020a056a00228700b0062d7c0ccb3asm15424202pfe.103.2023.04.28.09.51.42 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 28 Apr 2023 09:51:43 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2023 10:51:42 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.9.1 Subject: Re: [PATCH] testsuite: adjust NOP expectations for RISC-V Content-Language: en-US To: Palmer Dabbelt Cc: jbeulich@suse.com, ro@CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE, mikestump@comcast.net, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org References: From: Jeff Law In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_FROM,NICE_REPLY_A,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,TXREP,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE 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: On 4/28/23 10:43, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: > On Fri, 28 Apr 2023 08:20:24 PDT (-0700), jeffreyalaw@gmail.com wrote: >> >> >> On 4/27/23 01:39, Jan Beulich via Gcc-patches wrote: >>> On 26.04.2023 17:45, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: >>>> On Wed, 26 Apr 2023 08:26:26 PDT (-0700), gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 4/25/23 08:50, Jan Beulich via Gcc-patches wrote: >>>>>> RISC-V will emit ".option nopic" when -fno-pie is in effect, which >>>>>> matches the generic pattern. Just like done for Alpha, special-case >>>>>> RISC-V. >>>>>> --- >>>>>> A couple more targets look to be affected as well, simply because >>>>>> their >>>>>> "no-operation" insn doesn't match the expectation. With the >>>>>> apparently >>>>>> necessary further special casing I then also question the presence of >>>>>> "SWYM" in the generic pattern. >>>>>> >>>>>> An alternative here might be to use dg-additional-options to add e.g. >>>>>> -fpie. I don't think I know all possible implications of doing so, >>>>>> though. >>>> >>>> Looks like there's already a no-pie for SPARC.  Nothing's jumping >>>> out as >>>> to why, but I'm not super familiar with `-fpatchable-function-entry`. >>>> >>>>> I think this is fine.  Go ahead and install it. >>>> >>>> We run into this sort of thing somewhat frequently.  Maybe we want a DG >>>> matcher that avoids matching assembler directives?  Or maybe even a >>>> "scan-assembler-nop-times" type thing, given that different ports have >>>> different names for the instruction? >>>> >>>> I don't see reason to block fixing the test on something bigger, >>>> though, >>>> so seems fine for trunk.  Presumably we'd want to backport this as >>>> well? >>> >>> Perhaps, but in order to do so I'd need to be given the respective okay. >> Given how often we're trying to avoid matching directives, particularly >> directives which refer to filenames this sounds like a good idea to me. > > I think the ask there was for an OK to backport this fix to 13?  So I > guess more concretely: > > OK for trunk.  OK to backport for 13? Sure, OK for backporting as well. jeff