From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 48DBB3854167 for ; Fri, 21 Oct 2022 10:57:47 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 48DBB3854167 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1666349867; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=OKHZWTfD6kMAO6etfbZe4tchU6P9+r5Zy7Ki61SOxFw=; b=Ld1Lu3HDkuv5yZlb51hLjuvSdS2MbX0gzAxviIybtkSnKHsohcfuADT24+Os8w2lApKiPH omwKcgmuDqilmMy+mqdPFg5Miyg6wEcPweHAJ57tveZGitSejpgxHk4dEwIU/deThZi/lE p/oOFeMXHmH+ui3dS7Zr6W5igBKjEl0= Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mx3-rdu2.redhat.com [66.187.233.73]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-88-maLvf_DdNI6yWtBUMJ8H7Q-1; Fri, 21 Oct 2022 06:57:45 -0400 X-MC-Unique: maLvf_DdNI6yWtBUMJ8H7Q-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 53F543814584 for ; Fri, 21 Oct 2022 10:57:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from oldenburg.str.redhat.com (unknown [10.2.16.74]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7C39A1759E; Fri, 21 Oct 2022 10:57:44 +0000 (UTC) From: Florian Weimer To: Florian Weimer via Gcc Cc: Jakub Jelinek Subject: Re: C89isms in the test suite References: <87wn8tbmdr.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> <87o7u5bknf.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> <87k04tbim9.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2022 12:57:42 +0200 In-Reply-To: <87k04tbim9.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> (Florian Weimer via Gcc's message of "Fri, 21 Oct 2022 12:01:34 +0200") Message-ID: <87fsfhbg0p.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.1 on 10.11.54.5 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE,TXREP 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: * Florian Weimer via Gcc: > * Jakub Jelinek: > >> On Fri, Oct 21, 2022 at 11:17:40AM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: >>> So we would patch the tests? >> >> Depends on how large the patch is, but I'd say so. >> >>> I guess we can make sure we use =E2=80=9Cint main >>> (void)=E2=80=9D etc. at the same time. >> >> Why? Isn't int main () {} in C2X the same thing as int main (void) {} ? >> int main () {...} is in 3500+ C tests and every day a few are added... > > Is this really possible? For function pointers, it's an ABI change. > int (*) () and int (*) (void) have different calling conventions on some > ABIs (e.g., powerpc64le-linux-gnu). The ABI difference goes away once > the callees are rebuilt, and I think such rebuilt callees are compatible > with either calling convention. I'm probably wrong about that. I kind find the place where the rs6000 backend would use the extra space for general-purpose spilling. Thanks, Florian