From: Iain Sandoe <idsandoe@googlemail.com>
To: Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com>
Cc: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely.gcc@gmail.com>,
Jim Wilson <jimw@sifive.com>, GCC Development <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: gcc vs clang for non-power-2 atomic structures
Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2019 18:59:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <DEBD590E-3F3D-4D23-8509-765D46252384@googlemail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1908231558130.10989@digraph.polyomino.org.uk>
Hi Joseph,
> On 23 Aug 2019, at 17:14, Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 23 Aug 2019, Iain Sandoe wrote:
>
>> absolutely, it’s the psABI that’s lacking here - the compilers (as commented
>> by Richard Smith in a referenced thread) should not be making ABI up…
>
> With over 50 target architectures supported in GCC, most of which probably
> don't have anyone maintaining a psABI for them, you don't get support for
> new language features that require an ABI without making some reasonable
> default choice that allows the features to work everywhere and then
> letting architecture maintainers liaise with ABI maintainers in the case
> where such exist.
yes. That’s perfectly reasonable
However, it’s more than a little disappointing that X86, for which I would hope
that the psABI _was_ considered supported, remains silent on the issue so long
after it arose (I guess the interested parties with $ need to sponsor some work
to update it).
> (ABIs for atomics have the further tricky issue that there can be multiple
> choices for how to map the memory model onto a given architecture; see
> <https://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~pes20/cpp/cpp0xmappings.html>. So it's not
> just a matter of type sizes and alignment.)
Indeed, I have tangled a bit with that trying to adapt libatomic to be better
behaved on Darwin.
> but where psABIs
> specify something we do of course need to follow it (and the choice may be
> OS-specific, not just processor-specific, where the ABI is defined by the
> default compiler for some OS).
agreed .. it seems highly likely for X86 as things stand - since there’s a
bunch of things already out there with different ABIs baked in.
>
> Note: it's likely some front-end code, and stdatomic.h, might have to
> change to handle the possibility of atomic types being larger than
> non-atomic, as those end up using type-generic atomic load / store
> built-in functions, and those certainly expect pointers to arguments of
> the same size (when one argument is the atomic type and one non-atomic).
It seems to me that whatever might be chosen for the definitive psABI / platform
(i.e. arch + OS + version) going forward, we will need to support what has
been emitted in the past.
So a recommendation for suitable FE hooks (and preferably a way to make
the C11 atomic match the std::atomic, even if this is “only” a QoI issue),
would be worth addressing.
thanks
Iain
>
> --
> Joseph S. Myers
> joseph@codesourcery.com
prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-08-23 18:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-08-22 23:56 Jim Wilson
2019-08-23 7:21 ` Iain Sandoe
2019-08-23 9:36 ` Jonathan Wakely
2019-08-23 10:13 ` Iain Sandoe
2019-08-23 11:17 ` Jonathan Wakely
2019-08-23 16:14 ` Joseph Myers
2019-08-23 18:49 ` Jim Wilson
2019-08-23 18:59 ` Iain Sandoe [this message]
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=DEBD590E-3F3D-4D23-8509-765D46252384@googlemail.com \
--to=idsandoe@googlemail.com \
--cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=jimw@sifive.com \
--cc=joseph@codesourcery.com \
--cc=jwakely.gcc@gmail.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).