From: Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com>
To: "Uecker, Martin" <Martin.Uecker@med.uni-goettingen.de>
Cc: "gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org" <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>,
"law@redhat.com" <law@redhat.com>,
"ebotcazou@adacore.com" <ebotcazou@adacore.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2][C][ADA] use function descriptors instead of trampolines in C
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2018 22:35:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1808202227370.646@digraph.polyomino.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1534774021.5798.6.camel@med.uni-goettingen.de>
On Mon, 20 Aug 2018, Uecker, Martin wrote:
> This is a new version which adds proper changelog entries and
> a test case (no actual code changes).
Please include the overall description of a change in every version
submitted. That is, the patch submission message should both include a
description of the current version (as in a git-style commit message) and,
if relevant, a description of what changed relative to the previous
version of the patch (which would not go in the commit message).
A key thing I'm not clear on is what the user-visible difference in
compiler behavior is supposed to be with this patch. Whatever that
user-visible difference is, I'd expect it to result in some change to the
documentation of -ftrampolines in invoke.texi (describing the new feature,
or changing a description of a limitation of an existing feature, or
something like that).
> +/* { dg-do run { target x86_64-*-* } } */
It is always wrong for a test to use x86_64-*-* like that, because
anything that should be tested for 64-bit code generation for an x86_64
target should also be tested for i[34567]86-*-* -m64, and if you don't
want to test for 32-bit code generation, you need to avoid testing for
x86_64-*-* -m32, which that test would test for. Anything genuinely
x86-specific should go in gcc.target/i386 and then be conditioned on
effective-target keywords such as lp64 if necessary.
I don't see why this is target-specific (if it is, the documentation for
users in invoke.texi should explain what targets it works for and what it
doesn't work for) anyway. I'd expect it to be a target-independent
feature with a target-independent test or tests.
Once there is sufficient user-level documentation showing what the
intended semantics are, then it may be possible to evaluate how the
implementation achieves that.
--
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-08-20 22:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 48+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-08-11 16:41 [RFC] [PATCH][C][ADA] " Uecker, Martin
2018-08-18 16:33 ` Uecker, Martin
2018-08-20 14:07 ` [PATCH v2][C][ADA] " Uecker, Martin
2018-08-20 22:35 ` Joseph Myers [this message]
2018-08-21 6:17 ` Uecker, Martin
2018-08-21 21:34 ` Joseph Myers
2018-08-22 6:09 ` Uecker, Martin
2018-08-22 15:49 ` Joseph Myers
2018-11-04 20:49 ` [PATCH v3][C][ADA] " Uecker, Martin
2018-12-03 10:29 ` Uecker, Martin
2018-12-03 21:56 ` Jeff Law
2018-12-12 18:12 ` [PATCH v4][C][ADA] " Uecker, Martin
2018-12-13 23:35 ` Jeff Law
2018-12-14 10:05 ` Uecker, Martin
2018-12-14 23:36 ` Jeff Law
2018-12-15 1:20 ` Martin Sebor
2018-12-16 13:46 ` Uecker, Martin
2018-12-16 16:13 ` Jeff Law
2018-12-16 22:46 ` Uecker, Martin
2018-12-17 15:26 ` Szabolcs Nagy
2018-12-17 18:22 ` Uecker, Martin
2018-12-17 19:24 ` Szabolcs Nagy
2018-12-18 15:23 ` Paul Koning
2018-12-18 15:32 ` Jakub Jelinek
2018-12-18 16:03 ` Jeff Law
2018-12-18 16:25 ` Jakub Jelinek
2018-12-18 16:29 ` Uecker, Martin
2018-12-18 16:33 ` Uecker, Martin
2018-12-18 16:42 ` Jakub Jelinek
2018-12-19 19:53 ` Uecker, Martin
2018-12-19 20:08 ` Jakub Jelinek
2018-12-19 21:28 ` Wilco Dijkstra
2018-12-21 21:41 ` Hans-Peter Nilsson
2018-12-21 22:07 ` Uecker, Martin
2018-12-20 13:29 ` Wilco Dijkstra
2018-12-18 16:27 ` Uecker, Martin
2018-12-17 17:29 ` Jeff Law
2018-12-17 18:07 ` Uecker, Martin
2018-12-17 18:41 ` Andreas Schwab
2018-12-21 8:03 ` [PATCH v5][C][ADA] " Uecker, Martin
2019-01-13 21:19 ` [PING] " Uecker, Martin
2019-01-14 20:16 ` Jeff Law
2019-06-24 21:35 ` [PATCH v6][C][ADA] " Uecker, Martin
2019-08-09 23:42 ` Jeff Law
2019-08-10 10:16 ` Uecker, Martin
2018-12-19 19:11 ` [PATCH v4][C][ADA] " Uecker, Martin
2018-12-17 17:31 ` Martin Sebor
2018-12-17 18:09 ` Uecker, Martin
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=alpine.DEB.2.21.1808202227370.646@digraph.polyomino.org.uk \
--to=joseph@codesourcery.com \
--cc=Martin.Uecker@med.uni-goettingen.de \
--cc=ebotcazou@adacore.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=law@redhat.com \
/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).