This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [Patch AArch64] Add cpu_defines.h for AArch64.
- From: Ramana Radhakrishnan <ramana dot gcc at googlemail dot com>
- To: Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gmail dot com>
- Cc: Ramana Radhakrishnan <ramana dot radhakrishnan at foss dot arm dot com>, "gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, "libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org" <libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Tue, 19 May 2015 17:03:05 +0100
- Subject: Re: [Patch AArch64] Add cpu_defines.h for AArch64.
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <555B327F dot 3090107 at foss dot arm dot com> <4075D774-3A43-4507-B34E-DB505371E57D at gmail dot com>
- Reply-to: ramrad01 at arm dot com
On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 4:54 PM, <pinskia@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>> On May 19, 2015, at 5:54 AM, Ramana Radhakrishnan <ramana.radhakrishnan@foss.arm.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Like the ARM port, the AArch64 ports needs to set glibc_integral_traps to false as integer divide instructions do not trap.
>>
>> Bootstrapped and regression tested on aarch64-none-linux-gnu
>>
>> Ok to apply ?
>
> Not really questioning your patch but questioning libstdc++'s defaults.
> I wonder if this should be the default as most targets don't trap, only a few that does. And it should be safer default to say they don't trap too?
How about we #error out if targets do *not* define some of these
defaults in libstdc++ ? There are far more ports with weak memory
models, and the defaults for _GLIBCXX_READ/WRITE_BARRIER also appear
unsafe . I was toying with a patch like that to force targets to
define this sort of thing but I need to read more of configure.host
before I make up my mind.
regards
Ramana
>
> Thanks,
> Andrew
>
>
>>
>> regards
>> Ramana
>>
>>
>> 2015-05-17 Ramana Radhakrishnan <ramana.radhakrishnan@arm.com>
>>
>> * configure.host: Define cpu_defines_dir for AArch64
>> * config/cpu/aarch64/cpu_defines.h: New file.
>> <0002-Do-the-same-for-AArch64.patch>