Re: [avr] fno-caller-saves and regression tests
On 09.08.2016 07:33, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj wrote: Hi Johann, Turning off -fcaller-saves for AVR makes the testcase I had for PR 71873 pass unless I explicitly add -fcaller-saves to force the compiler to generate the triggering insn patterns. Wonder if we should modify the existing test cases in gcc.target/avr to be tested both ways (with and without caller saves)? At least the register allocation related ones probably won't catch regressions. Regards Senthil Testing both way makes only sense, IMO, if we actually "support" -fcaller-saves and if someone is going to fix reg alloc bugs. The current live cycle of such ICEs is: 1) Someone reports register alloc ICE to bugzilla 2) It's not fixed because there are no resources 3) Bug is closed because life cycle of gcc branch ends 4) Problem pops up on newer branch and with different test case 5) goto 1) I am already very happy if RA ICEs for default options get fixed. Many thanks to you for digging into that difficult matter. Re you original question, I am fine with whatever approach the one that gets involved with these RA bugs will prefer. From my experience, caller-saves degrades code quality and increases probability of ICEs from reload. If -fcaller-saves makes it easier for you to hunt or monitor respective bugs, feel free to adjust the test cases. Or you might consider adding -fcaller-saves variant(s) to your torture options. Johann
Re: [RFD] Extremely large alignment of read-only strings
Dixi quod… >Alexander Monakov dixit: > >>First of all, I think option -malign-data=abi (new in GCC 5) addresses your >>need: it can be used to reduce the default (excessive) alignment to just the >>psABI-dictated value (you can play with this at https://gcc.godbolt.org even >>if > >Ah, nice! … except -malign-data=abi is, apparently, cris-only. bye, //mirabilos -- Gast: „Ein Bier, bitte!“ Wirt: „Geht auch alkoholfrei?“ Gast: „Geht auch Spielgeld?“
Re: [RFD] Extremely large alignment of read-only strings
On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 1:01 PM, Thorsten Glaser wrote: > Dixi quod… > >>Alexander Monakov dixit: >> >>>First of all, I think option -malign-data=abi (new in GCC 5) addresses your >>>need: it can be used to reduce the default (excessive) alignment to just the >>>psABI-dictated value (you can play with this at https://gcc.godbolt.org even >>>if >> >>Ah, nice! > > … except -malign-data=abi is, apparently, cris-only. > '-malign-data=TYPE' Control how GCC aligns variables. Supported values for TYPE are 'compat' uses increased alignment value compatible uses GCC 4.8 and earlier, 'abi' uses alignment value as specified by the psABI, and 'cacheline' uses increased alignment value to match the cache line size. 'compat' is the default. is supported by x86. -- H.J.
Re: [RFD] Extremely large alignment of read-only strings
On Fri, 12 Aug 2016, Thorsten Glaser wrote: > Dixi quod? > > >Alexander Monakov dixit: > > > >>First of all, I think option -malign-data=abi (new in GCC 5) addresses your > >>need: it can be used to reduce the default (excessive) alignment to just the > >>psABI-dictated value (you can play with this at https://gcc.godbolt.org > >>even if > > > >Ah, nice! > > ? except -malign-data=abi is, apparently, cris-only. ITYM "i386-only". I see "malign-data=" in gcc/config/i386/i386.opt. (Not sure why the CRIS port was mentioned at all. There's no option named "-malign-data=abi" for cris-*; the closest is an option named "-mdata-align".) brgds, H-P
Re: [RFD] Extremely large alignment of read-only strings
Hans-Peter Nilsson dixit: >> ? except -malign-data=abi is, apparently, cris-only. >ITYM "i386-only". I see "malign-data=" in >gcc/config/i386/i386.opt. No (actually tested on amd64, which didn’t support it). >(Not sure why the CRIS port was mentioned at all. The GCC 6 texinfo documentation *only* lists this for cris. >There's no option named "-malign-data=abi" for >cris-*; the closest is an option named "-mdata-align".) Hmm… maybe that’s the confusion. Thanks, //mirabilos -- Stéphane, I actually don’t block Googlemail, they’re just too utterly stupid to successfully deliver to me (or anyone else using Greylisting and not whitelisting their ranges). Same for a few other providers such as Hotmail. Some spammers (Yahoo) I do block.
Re: [RFD] Extremely large alignment of read-only strings
On Fri, 12 Aug 2016, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> Hans-Peter Nilsson dixit:
>
> >> ? except -malign-data=abi is, apparently, cris-only.
>
> >ITYM "i386-only". I see "malign-data=" in
> >gcc/config/i386/i386.opt.
>
> No (actually tested on amd64, which didn?t support it).
Weird.
> >(Not sure why the CRIS port was mentioned at all.
>
> The GCC 6 texinfo documentation *only* lists this for cris.
I definitely do *not* see what you see.
On the gcc-6-branch, in gcc/doc/invoke.texi, I see
-malign-data=@var{type} listed only under @emph{x86 Options} and
@item -malign-data=@var{type} only under @node x86 Options.
brgds, H-P
