From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pg1-x52d.google.com (mail-pg1-x52d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::52d]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0717F3858D37 for ; Fri, 28 Apr 2023 16:43:20 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 0717F3858D37 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=dabbelt.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=dabbelt.com Received: by mail-pg1-x52d.google.com with SMTP id 41be03b00d2f7-51f1b6e8179so7236460a12.3 for ; Fri, 28 Apr 2023 09:43:19 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=dabbelt-com.20221208.gappssmtp.com; s=20221208; t=1682700199; x=1685292199; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:to:from:cc :in-reply-to:subject:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=TvDSNSsbroBiphHGJXRdVDZFDLzEoh9Zqvtq5kth8D8=; b=e82144CApWrfwmcSuJJnYDnBaG1COc7dXPRdpI+vczDOlFUj6eEaiPI0iaFMFe1baI YM0n94XDuPZF34PB90yqdLMKL/uf2jUOrJcuZ8h8zsdCXC4AyXEcxI7Oa06cqf13FAFi 1Pz3u38TYDYOI/8PIGgdbA2XbbCGbrtl4MO3BjdXN8ta9eUr7/+Wpp5OMnCkaWKyVffJ 2pOgBfDr/GYVk2GcJarJQzdDhbSys4taI41TwAT/0s6YWgwdMD9EAnLb2IkoYefPPIbr L3lnjuKXdYCirjb25yzUG3pYq7Jhaf6R55tR07aAefmKzst/WwYBp4H6Jt4Z8vj33vMn 5hqA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1682700199; x=1685292199; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:to:from:cc :in-reply-to:subject:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=TvDSNSsbroBiphHGJXRdVDZFDLzEoh9Zqvtq5kth8D8=; b=kukAoxUL47iUj/Qq7EmRO6uf9z0SSOpYdIaa9tqzAGPcikzib42Bt4CEN/9bDjLxQt r+m1C2WXYYGE9tmlLEzTb1Q+EdLFRoHsEQq9lZUQeOS4j+NLSAKiUam9l+6kv1ybWtxt ZHHMFbsB+a8zwE3LZdtfOXoXW02Hqh64Vi+zJB4zAsdzCDvqWERnWnUeu4/qaylBKnZb wrlKTvVa2/69JygGYeXG3Prb/HECUqotB04fZOnJnFfl1B2XriQHONGdFiH7DOOLXsiq MS3QjKuPhpc64LiKLUoyA3GYoiHYOjpzqk+2P1X+pX/7gAyA8Rci9Q3t6nX0NAhu3jaH xQwQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AC+VfDyzqeVBDmfWlh1fgTvsUxAIszntAvPVceZGR/NjCmE+0aKKHojk tXN5wg7jJQJrWcSkH6LJ/3nFyg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACHHUZ6sfAV3RH4GEgA6Y+eIlp6qsCcv8Ov3RCS9K9ucPum2Uv52MIzDC+EKuOwAvMK7kSSiZZ/CNg== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:ce96:b0:246:ac68:297 with SMTP id g22-20020a17090ace9600b00246ac680297mr6173736pju.0.1682700198657; Fri, 28 Apr 2023 09:43:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([135.180.227.0]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id v13-20020a17090a0c8d00b00246b1b4a3ffsm1711898pja.0.2023.04.28.09.43.18 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 28 Apr 2023 09:43:18 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2023 09:43:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Original-Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2023 09:43:04 PDT (-0700) Subject: Re: [PATCH] testsuite: adjust NOP expectations for RISC-V In-Reply-To: CC: jbeulich@suse.com, ro@CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE, mikestump@comcast.net, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org From: Palmer Dabbelt To: jeffreyalaw@gmail.com Message-ID: Mime-Version: 1.0 (MHng) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,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 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?