This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Darwin bootstrap failure following wide int merge
- From: Richard Biener <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>
- To: Richard Biener <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>, Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>, Mike Stump <mikestump at comcast dot net>, FX <fxcoudert at gmail dot com>, echristo at gmail dot com, Stan Shebs <stanshebs at earthlink dot net>, GCC Development <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, glisse at gcc dot gnu dot org, Kenneth Zadeck <zadeck at naturalbridge dot com>, gcc-patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Gerald Pfeifer <gerald at pfeifer dot com>, Richard Sandiford <rdsandiford at googlemail dot com>
- Date: Wed, 28 May 2014 11:40:20 +0200
- Subject: Re: Darwin bootstrap failure following wide int merge
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <97BE9F46-EB35-4B06-9065-915D7259E701 at gmail dot com> <769D0D77-6DB3-421F-9006-326B0E2B42FE at gmail dot com> <71C2DDBB-87AE-491D-9074-F5744B8AFF61 at comcast dot net> <20140528065033 dot GV10386 at tucnak dot redhat dot com> <CAFiYyc2tLShbmh_4RzMqCO+yky8voEOhTpY1aqjYMLq+dAP8Pg at mail dot gmail dot com> <87fvjub9an dot fsf at talisman dot default>
On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 10:24 AM, Richard Sandiford
> Richard Biener <email@example.com> writes:
>> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 8:50 AM, Jakub Jelinek <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>>> On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 08:36:31AM -0700, Mike Stump wrote:
>>>> On May 26, 2014, at 2:22 AM, FX <email@example.com> wrote:
>>>> >> This causes GCC bootstrap to fail on Darwin systems (whose system
>>>> > compiler is clang-based). Since PR 61146 was resolved as INVALID
>>>> > (but Iâm not sure itâs the right call, see below), Iâve filed a
>>>> > separate report for the bootstrap issue
>>>> > (https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61315).
>>>> > Since my PR has been closed twice by Andrew Pinski (âitâs clangâs
>>>> > fault, bouh ouhâ), Iâd ask the maintainers to step in. Can we
>>>> > please provide a GCC that works for the default darwin setup? Or at
>>>> > least drop darwin as secondary target and document the failure?
>>>> The best coarse of action, post a patch, have it reviewed and put in.
>>>> Current action, a patch has been posted, the review is outstanding, Iâd
>>>> like to see it put in; though, I am curious why the casts were there in
>>>> the first place.
>>> Note, haven't added them there, but from what I can test, the casts there
>>> can serve as a compile time check that the right type is used, e.g.
>>> unsigned long i;
>>> foo (void)
>>> asm volatile ("# %0 %1" : "=r" ((unsigned long long) i) : "0"
>>> ((unsigned long long) 0));
>> Ah, interesting. A not-so-hineous extension then.
> In that case, how about just protecting the include with:
> #if GCC_VERSION >= 4300 && (W_TYPE_SIZE == 32 || defined (__SIZEOF_INT128__))
> rather than:
> #if GCC_VERSION >= 3000 && (W_TYPE_SIZE == 32 || defined (__SIZEOF_INT128__))
> so that clang will fail the version check? At the end of the day we
> only really care what happens during stage 2 and 3. Cross-compilers
> built with recentish gccs will still benefit.
Works for me (thus, pre-approved with a comment explaining the version