From: "Kewen.Lin" <linkw@linux.ibm.com>
To: Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>
Cc: Iain Sandoe <iain@sandoe.co.uk>, GCC Patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rs6000: Rework option -mpowerpc64 handling [PR106680]
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2022 10:15:58 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <a8e5fe22-5495-acea-a64f-f332d3e0aebd@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20221003211530.GQ25951@gate.crashing.org>
Hi Segher!
Thanks for the comments again!
on 2022/10/4 05:15, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 30, 2022 at 08:15:37PM +0800, Kewen.Lin wrote:
>> on 2022/9/30 01:11, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
>>>> +#ifdef OS_MISSING_POWERPC64
>>>> + else if (OS_MISSING_POWERPC64)
>>>> + /* It's unexpected to have OPTION_MASK_POWERPC64 on for OSes which
>>>> + miss powerpc64 support, so disable it. */
>>>> + rs6000_isa_flags &= ~OPTION_MASK_POWERPC64;
>>>> +#endif
>>>
>>> All silent stuff is always bad.
>>
>> OK, with more testings for replacing warning instead of silently disablement
>> I noticed that some disablement is needed, one typical case is -m32 compilation
>> on ppc64, we have OPTION_MASK_POWERPC64 on from TARGET_DEFAULT which is used
>> for initialization (It makes sense to have it on in TARGET_DEFAULT because
>> of it's 64 bit cpu). And -m32 compilation matches OS_MISSING_POWERPC64
>> (!TARGET_64BIT), so it's the case that we have an implicit OPTION_MASK_POWERPC64
>> on and OS_MISSING_POWERPC64 holds, but it's unexpected not to disable it but
>> warn it.
>
> Right. If If mpowerpc64 is enabled while OS_MISSING_POWERPC64, warn for
> that;
>
Currently if option powerpc64 is enabled explicitly while OS_MISSING_POWERPC64,
there is no warning. One typical case is -m32 compilation on ppc64. I made
a patch to warn for this case as you suggested (btw, this change can be taken
separately from this rework), it caused some test cases to fail as below:
gcc.dg/vect/vect-82_64.c
gcc.dg/vect/vect-83_64.c
gcc.target/powerpc/bswap64-4.c
gcc.target/powerpc/ppc64-double-1.c
gcc.target/powerpc/pr106680-4.c
gcc.target/powerpc/rs6000-fpint-2.c
It's fine to fix them with one additional option "-w" to disable the warning.
But IIUC one concern is that if we want to test with "--target_board=unix'{-m32,
-m32/-mpowerpc64}'", the latter combination will always have this warning,
with one extra "-w" (that is -m32/-mpowerpc64/-w) can make some cases which
aim to check warning msg ineffective. So maybe we want to re-consider it
(like just leaving it as before)?
> and if mpowerpc64 was only implicit, disable it as well (and say
> we did!)
But on ppc64 linux, for -m32 compilation mpowerpc64 is implicitly enabled
since it's with bi-arch supported, I made a patch to disable it as well as
warn it, it can't be bootstrapped since it warned for -m32 build (-Werror)
and failed. So I refined it to something like:
+ /* With RS6000_BI_ARCH defined (bi-architecture (32/64) supported),
+ TARGET_DEFAULT has bit MASK_POWERPC64 on by default, to keep the
+ behavior consistent (like: no warnings for -m32 on ppc64), we
+ just sliently disable it. Otherwise, disable it and warn. */
+ rs6000_isa_flags &= ~OPTION_MASK_POWERPC64;
+#ifndef RS6000_BI_ARCH
+ warning (0, "powerpc64 is unexpected to be enabled on the "
+ "current OS");
+#endif
BR,
Kewen
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-10-10 2:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-09-28 5:30 Kewen.Lin
2022-09-28 6:37 ` Iain Sandoe
2022-09-28 16:18 ` Iain Sandoe
2022-09-28 19:09 ` Iain Sandoe
2022-09-29 5:45 ` Kewen.Lin
2022-09-29 8:16 ` Iain Sandoe
2022-09-29 9:12 ` Kewen.Lin
2022-09-29 16:14 ` Iain Sandoe
2022-09-29 17:04 ` Segher Boessenkool
2022-09-29 18:25 ` Iain Sandoe
2022-09-29 18:37 ` Segher Boessenkool
2022-09-30 9:26 ` Kewen.Lin
2022-09-29 17:11 ` Segher Boessenkool
2022-09-30 12:15 ` Kewen.Lin
2022-10-03 21:15 ` Segher Boessenkool
2022-10-10 2:15 ` Kewen.Lin [this message]
2022-10-10 13:58 ` Segher Boessenkool
2022-10-12 8:26 ` Kewen.Lin
2022-09-28 21:30 ` Segher Boessenkool
2022-09-28 23:04 ` Iain Sandoe
2022-09-28 23:16 ` Iain Sandoe
2022-09-29 17:26 ` Segher Boessenkool
2022-09-29 17:18 ` Segher Boessenkool
2022-09-29 18:33 ` Iain Sandoe
2022-09-29 18:50 ` Segher Boessenkool
2022-09-28 22:04 ` Segher Boessenkool
2022-09-29 6:16 ` Kewen.Lin
2022-09-29 18:56 ` Segher Boessenkool
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=a8e5fe22-5495-acea-a64f-f332d3e0aebd@linux.ibm.com \
--to=linkw@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=iain@sandoe.co.uk \
--cc=segher@kernel.crashing.org \
/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).