From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25348 invoked by alias); 15 Dec 2014 09:42:41 -0000 Mailing-List: contact libffi-discuss-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: libffi-discuss-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 25336 invoked by uid 89); 15 Dec 2014 09:42:40 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: e06smtp16.uk.ibm.com Received: from e06smtp16.uk.ibm.com (HELO e06smtp16.uk.ibm.com) (195.75.94.112) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 09:42:39 +0000 Received: from /spool/local by e06smtp16.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 09:42:35 -0000 Received: from d06dlp01.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (9.149.20.13) by e06smtp16.uk.ibm.com (192.168.101.146) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 09:42:33 -0000 Received: from b06cxnps4074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06relay11.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.109.196]) by d06dlp01.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A491117D8042 for ; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 09:42:57 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av08.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av08.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.37.249]) by b06cxnps4074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id sBF9gXcg24707238 for ; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 09:42:33 GMT Received: from d06av08.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by d06av08.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id sBF9gWdA001330 for ; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 02:42:33 -0700 Received: from bl3ahm9f.de.ibm.com (dyn-9-152-212-213.boeblingen.de.ibm.com [9.152.212.213]) by d06av08.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/NCO v10.0 AVin) with ESMTP id sBF9gWkE000877 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 15 Dec 2014 02:42:32 -0700 Received: from dvogt by bl3ahm9f.de.ibm.com with local (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1Y0SAZ-0001MN-Qg; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 10:42:23 +0100 Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2014 09:42:00 -0000 From: Dominik Vogt To: libffi-discuss@sourceware.org, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, gofrontend-dev@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [gofrontend-dev] Re: [PATCH 00/13] Go closures, libffi, and the static chain Message-ID: <20141215094223.GA3890@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Reply-To: libffi-discuss@sourceware.org Mail-Followup-To: libffi-discuss@sourceware.org, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, gofrontend-dev@googlegroups.com References: <1412973773-3942-1-git-send-email-rth@redhat.com> <20141211090623.GA30484@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20141211092144.GE4283@bubble.grove.modra.org> <20141211103106.GA9789@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20141211122519.GA26215@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <5489F6D0.8020009@redhat.com> <20141212120630.GA32026@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <548B307D.60000@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <548B307D.60000@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-TM-AS-MML: disable X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER x-cbid: 14121509-0025-0000-0000-000002E06B21 X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2014/txt/msg00261.txt.bz2 On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 10:14:21AM -0800, Richard Henderson wrote: > On 12/12/2014 04:06 AM, Dominik Vogt wrote: > > I'm not sure I've posted the missing patch anywhere yet, so it's > > attached to this message. At the moment it enables > > FFI_TYPE_COMPLEX only for s390[x], but eventually this should be > > used unconditionally. > > Thanks for that. I'd been meaning to get around to that. I'll change the test > to use FFI_TARGET_HAS_COMPLEX_TYPE and apply it to my branch. Good. I'm not sure whether it's a good idea to expose FFI_TARGET_HAS_COMPLEX_TYPE as part of the libffi interface though. It was meant as a temporary thing to be removed once all platforms supported by libffi have implemented complex support. A while ago I've posted a patch to change the macro's name to begin with an underscore to make that clearer. > > (This still leaves the dynamic linking issue if we do not use > > libffi for reflection calls with x86* and s390[x]. Is the plan to > > remove the platform specific abi code for the few platforms that > > have it? I see no way to make them work with the static chain > > patch anyway.) > > Well, the x86 paths were updated to work with the static chain, but indeed that > required assembly rather than cheating and using C as you did. > > But removing all of that was always my goal. Indeed, my branch now has a patch > to remove all of the target-specific code. Fine with that. I wouldn't have written the s390 specific Abi code in Go if libffi had been an option back then. Ciao Dominik ^_^ ^_^ -- Dominik Vogt IBM Germany