From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pf1-x433.google.com (mail-pf1-x433.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::433]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2B0D93858D37; Fri, 28 Apr 2023 17:40:19 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 2B0D93858D37 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-x433.google.com with SMTP id d2e1a72fcca58-64115e652eeso14272658b3a.0; Fri, 28 Apr 2023 10:40:19 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20221208; t=1682703618; x=1685295618; 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=BFMqvuCGkCMJh6GHfGtAdSF/sfmBPG71RPEsNYLyaBw=; b=itcB3EX0EixVOM9Dm1ypsUvbAKrOD+2bKTysp6EwTZYk4ZO13UbCe+wZ0IE6gxVHUD 6G8vMhO7NICa2PU7PssnvQdV5aOAs3xr9tL8SbvzoLy7mnpFviaCSJLaZm9rolBME340 +U0OdZZ/A3SB15aZCTlB3raVrhL9C+0M55wg0DwcFij0Rg8YuM173QLLy3TGrVnID/cF IP2LSAV+ifTBO8GyRNPExJMMq2erhirwT7m9Lr4GTf0qOB5DueVAWhvOOgUMXSFBjyBt 5YQYYRkcaRpR7Z/4B/YjLpwJi7XAwfBaX6EAkBX/rSfPearPR8iNoH0wIcf8wdseYhbd 1nSw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1682703618; x=1685295618; 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=BFMqvuCGkCMJh6GHfGtAdSF/sfmBPG71RPEsNYLyaBw=; b=S6pNPaoqTg2zA1icb/gnVSzzW4PpF3Nc8HpkF+88HttN/Clvl2zw33nCLQLTs2LN/O Rtcog6XZJdpv2bqL5A2ABQfWHlOvg2OmTj10xmqQDRRYKVLtTn/RWiTYSSaTBbxWFwlA LtNVDHiAflFWz7NDnKEy02yFn3xenRvKrEJvlTWNIUqF8NYj8A4jZAIpUI2EB0FFi2St SESsd+V2B7A3l6D4rk9pESat4GiDwRhnDKXRiz9r/oPZQCTJkA0Kpbnzk1wInC23QRuH 6s6IsvyDkw/aSHNFJFY473PHA6botSE/plISRYtIjFGcOfo/Thic83W2cC3unNRw3JBS JirA== X-Gm-Message-State: AC+VfDwoXFjeYd3RKIwXldNslXSyWgRiSlEUT18NSNTJo4LRQ/5eovEL sB/PNoGrHcvYyBU9gN5AqWk= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACHHUZ5FyRecjBCmtXgjBPboejEteZZPqKFIYZYUH6fyuqxy/DuClfReenq+hhUyJZMVekEdMtTxwA== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:ecc2:b0:1a5:1842:f7da with SMTP id a2-20020a170902ecc200b001a51842f7damr13089652plh.6.1682703617945; Fri, 28 Apr 2023 10:40:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPV6:2601:681:8600:13d0::99f? ([2601:681:8600:13d0::99f]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id jo17-20020a170903055100b001a9873495f2sm6903493plb.233.2023.04.28.10.40.16 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 28 Apr 2023 10:40:17 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2023 11:40:15 -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 v5 06/11] RISC-V: Strengthen atomic stores Content-Language: en-US To: Patrick O'Neill , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Cc: palmer@rivosinc.com, gnu-toolchain@rivosinc.com, vineetg@rivosinc.com, andrew@sifive.com, kito.cheng@sifive.com, dlustig@nvidia.com, cmuellner@gcc.gnu.org, andrea@rivosinc.com, hboehm@google.com References: <20230414170942.1695672-1-patrick@rivosinc.com> <20230427162301.1151333-1-patrick@rivosinc.com> <20230427162301.1151333-7-patrick@rivosinc.com> From: Jeff Law In-Reply-To: <20230427162301.1151333-7-patrick@rivosinc.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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 4/27/23 10:22, Patrick O'Neill wrote: > This change makes atomic stores strictly stronger than table A.6 of the > ISA manual. This mapping makes the overall patchset compatible with > table A.7 as well. > > 2023-04-27 Patrick O'Neill > > PR 89835 Should be "PR target/89835" > > gcc/ChangeLog: > > * config/riscv/sync.md: Needs some text here :-) I'm not objecting to this patch, but I think we've got an option question about whether or not this approach is too expensive for existing or soon arriving implementations. If the decision on that topic is to just pay the cost, then this patch is fine. If we decide to make compatibility optional to avoid the additional cost, then this will need suitable adjustments. Jeff