public inbox for gcc@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jan Hubicka <jh@suse.cz>
To: Jan Hubicka <jh@suse.cz>
Cc: Mark Mitchell <mark@codesourcery.com>,
	gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, David Edelsohn <dje@watson.ibm.com>,
	Zack Weinberg <zack@codesourcery.com>,
	"gcc@gcc.gnu.org" <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>,
	"libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org" <libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org>,
	Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: Implicit generation of runtime calls
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 14:51:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20021217221817.GG7486@kam.mff.cuni.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20021217221411.GF7486@kam.mff.cuni.cz>

> 
> Hi,
> this patch adds the infrastructure to determine whether the function call can
> be produced implicitly or not.  I am doing that by new array of declarations
> implicit_built_in_decls that has entry nonzero just for those builtins that are
> safe.
> In future we may want to modify the declarations so the builtin expansion can
> behave differently for implicit calls as they do already for __builtin_XXX calls
> and XXX calls.
> 
> DEF_BUILTIN now allows to declare whehter the function is available and I've
> categorized the functions according to C99 and C90 standards.
> I also added the TARGET_C99_FUNCTIONS defined to 1 by default and function
> to get the declaration in proper mode so conversions can be done easilly.
> 
> Thats it.  In the next step I would like to re-enable the transformation as
> next step once this part is polished.  I would also like to turn
> TARGET_MEM_FUNCTIONS into this scheme.  I intended to do this in one step but
> the patch is getting bigger than I would like it to be already.
> 
> I will happily add -fno-c99-builtins switch to configure and manage it to
> control TARGET_C99_FUNCTIONS if someone will make me believe that this is good.
> I think this is static knowledge about the particular port and the problems
> with autoconfiguration being different in different contexts, so it will
> bring us problems in reproducing failures reported in cross envorinment
> and so on.
> 
> I also don't think it makes sense to allow controlling each function
> individually.  We already support about 10-20 such functions and the number of
> them will increase.  I don't think runtimes are crazy enought to commonly
> support just arbitary subset of these, so this would just anoy.  We can invent
> 1-2 new categories (perhaps there can be category for runtimes deifning sinf
> but not sinl or cabs if such exists)
> 
> Bootstrapped/regtested mainline.

I also tested that it disables/enables the transformation as needed :)
In the followup I will add testcase to the testsuite so ports where
default is wrong will get caught and re-enable the transformation 

Honza

  reply	other threads:[~2002-12-17 22:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 67+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2002-12-16 13:52 basic-improvements merge status David Edelsohn
2002-12-16 13:57 ` Zack Weinberg
2002-12-16 14:23   ` David Edelsohn
2002-12-16 14:27     ` Jan Hubicka
2002-12-16 14:47       ` Neil Booth
2002-12-16 15:10         ` Jan Hubicka
2002-12-17  0:50           ` Gabriel Dos Reis
2002-12-17 15:54             ` Richard Henderson
2002-12-17 16:14               ` Gabriel Dos Reis
2002-12-18  5:29                 ` Jan Hubicka
2002-12-17 16:19               ` Matt Austern
2002-12-17 16:31                 ` Phil Edwards
2002-12-16 21:32         ` Joseph S. Myers
2002-12-16 17:01       ` Mark Mitchell
2002-12-17  0:47     ` Gabriel Dos Reis
2002-12-17  0:54       ` Jan Hubicka
2002-12-17  1:19         ` Gabriel Dos Reis
2002-12-16 14:29 ` Jan Hubicka
2002-12-16 14:29   ` David Edelsohn
2002-12-16 14:35     ` Jan Hubicka
2002-12-17  0:55     ` Gabriel Dos Reis
2002-12-17  0:58       ` Jan Hubicka
2002-12-17  1:53         ` Gabriel Dos Reis
2002-12-17  4:16           ` Jan Hubicka
2002-12-17  4:29             ` Fergus Henderson
2002-12-17  8:39             ` Gabriel Dos Reis
2002-12-17 13:58               ` Jan Hubicka
2002-12-16 14:44   ` David Edelsohn
2002-12-16 14:45     ` Jan Hubicka
2002-12-16 14:52       ` David Edelsohn
2002-12-16 14:54         ` Jan Hubicka
2002-12-16 17:05           ` Mark Mitchell
2002-12-17  0:44             ` Jan Hubicka
2002-12-17  0:46               ` Mark Mitchell
2002-12-17  0:51                 ` Jan Hubicka
2002-12-17  4:10                   ` Joseph S. Myers
2002-12-17  7:06                     ` Gabriel Dos Reis
2002-12-17 11:42                       ` Joseph S. Myers
2002-12-17  9:43                   ` Mark Mitchell
2002-12-17 14:06                     ` Jan Hubicka
2002-12-17 14:18                       ` Gabriel Dos Reis
2002-12-17 14:36                     ` Implicit generation of runtime calls Jan Hubicka
2002-12-17 14:51                       ` Jan Hubicka [this message]
2002-12-17  0:54                 ` basic-improvements merge status Jan Hubicka
2002-12-17  3:24                   ` Gabriel Dos Reis
2002-12-17  4:28                     ` Hot to configure sinf? Jan Hubicka
2002-12-17  8:24                       ` Gabriel Dos Reis
2002-12-17  1:51                 ` basic-improvements merge status Gabriel Dos Reis
2002-12-17 21:31                   ` Alexandre Oliva
2002-12-17 21:21                 ` Alexandre Oliva
2002-12-18  5:44                   ` Jan Hubicka
2002-12-17  1:16             ` Gabriel Dos Reis
2002-12-16 15:05         ` [libstdc++] " Jan Hubicka
2002-12-16 15:40       ` Dale Johannesen
2002-12-16 16:16         ` Jan Hubicka
2002-12-16 17:12           ` Dale Johannesen
2002-12-16 19:16             ` Fergus Henderson
2002-12-17  1:14           ` Gabriel Dos Reis
2002-12-17  3:48             ` Joseph S. Myers
2002-12-16 15:55       ` Benjamin Kosnik
2002-12-16 16:10         ` Jan Hubicka
2002-12-16 15:56     ` Andrew Pinski
2002-12-17  0:53   ` Gabriel Dos Reis
2002-12-17  0:56     ` Jan Hubicka
2002-12-17  1:22       ` Gabriel Dos Reis
2002-12-17  3:20         ` Gabriel Dos Reis
2002-12-17  2:12     ` Gabriel Dos Reis

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=20021217221817.GG7486@kam.mff.cuni.cz \
    --to=jh@suse.cz \
    --cc=dje@watson.ibm.com \
    --cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=mark@codesourcery.com \
    --cc=rth@redhat.com \
    --cc=zack@codesourcery.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).