Re: [RFC] Bridging the gap between the Linux Kernel Memory Consistency Model (LKMM) and C11/C++11 atomics

On Mon, Jul 03, 2023 at 03:20:31PM -0400, Olivier Dion wrote: [...] > NOTE: On x86-64, we found at least one corner case [7] with Clang where > a RELEASE exchange is optimized to a RELEASE store, when the returned > value of the exchange is unused, breaking the above expectations. > Although this t

Re: wishlist: support for shorter pointers

Am Mittwoch, dem 05.07.2023 um 07:26 +0200 schrieb Rafał Pietrak: > Hi, > > W dniu 5.07.2023 o 00:57, Martin Uecker pisze: > > Am Dienstag, dem 04.07.2023 um 16:46 +0200 schrieb Rafał Pietrak:... > [] > > > > > > Yes. named address spaces would be great. And for code, too. > > > > > > >

Re: wishlist: support for shorter pointers

Hi, W dniu 5.07.2023 o 09:29, Martin Uecker pisze: Am Mittwoch, dem 05.07.2023 um 07:26 +0200 schrieb Rafał Pietrak: [---] And if it's so ... there is no mention of how does it show up for "simple user" of the GCC (instead of the use of that "machinery" by creators of particular GCC port).

Re: wishlist: support for shorter pointers

On 05/07/2023 10:05, Rafał Pietrak via Gcc wrote: Hi, W dniu 5.07.2023 o 09:29, Martin Uecker pisze: Am Mittwoch, dem 05.07.2023 um 07:26 +0200 schrieb Rafał Pietrak: [---] And if it's so ... there is no mention of how does it show up for "simple user" of the GCC (instead of the use of th

GCC support addition for Safety compliances

Hi Team, Need support from the GCC GNU for the some safety compliances. Can you please guide or check which GCC support the safety compliances. Regards, Vishal B Patil vishal.b.pa...@cummins.com Dahanukar Colony, Kothrud Pune Maharashtra 411038 India

Re: wishlist: support for shorter pointers

Am Mittwoch, dem 05.07.2023 um 11:11 +0200 schrieb David Brown: > On 05/07/2023 10:05, Rafał Pietrak via Gcc wrote: ... > > In my personal opinion (which you are all free to disregard), named > address spaces were an interesting idea that failed.  I was > enthusiastic > about a number of the ex

Re: wishlist: support for shorter pointers

Am Mittwoch, dem 05.07.2023 um 10:05 +0200 schrieb Rafał Pietrak: > Hi, > > W dniu 5.07.2023 o 09:29, Martin Uecker pisze: > > Am Mittwoch, dem 05.07.2023 um 07:26 +0200 schrieb Rafał Pietrak: > [---] > > > And if it's so ... there is no mention of how does it show up for > > > "simple user" o

Re: wishlist: support for shorter pointers

Hi, W dniu 5.07.2023 o 11:11, David Brown pisze: On 05/07/2023 10:05, Rafał Pietrak via Gcc wrote: [---] type) would then be smaller.  At least, this is my understanding of how it could work. Note that this only applies to pointers declared to be of the address space specific type. 

Re: wishlist: support for shorter pointers

Hi W dniu 5.07.2023 o 11:29, Martin Uecker pisze: Am Mittwoch, dem 05.07.2023 um 10:05 +0200 schrieb Rafał Pietrak: [--] Then again ... apparently you are guessing the answer. Incidentally, that would be my guess, too. And while such "syntax" is not really desirable (since such att

Re: wishlist: support for shorter pointers

Am Mittwoch, dem 05.07.2023 um 12:17 +0200 schrieb Rafał Pietrak: > Hi > > W dniu 5.07.2023 o 11:29, Martin Uecker pisze: > > Am Mittwoch, dem 05.07.2023 um 10:05 +0200 schrieb Rafał Pietrak: > ... > > > > > Then again, should you happen to fall onto an > > > actual documentation of syntax to u

Re: Warning specifically for a returning noreturn

I see, thanks Andrew. Anyone else have opinions on this besides Liu or Andrew? The responses have been surprisingly quiet thus far best regards, Julian On Wed, 5 Jul 2023, 09:40 Andrew Pinski, wrote: > On Tue, Jul 4, 2023 at 6:32 PM Julian Waters > wrote: > > > > Hi Andrew, thanks for the qui

Re: Warning specifically for a returning noreturn

On Wed, 5 Jul 2023 at 12:01, Julian Waters via Gcc wrote: > > I see, thanks Andrew. > > Anyone else have opinions on this besides Liu or Andrew? The responses have > been surprisingly quiet thus far IMHO all warnings should have an option controlling them, so that you can disable them via pragmas

Re: wishlist: support for shorter pointers

On 05/07/2023 11:25, Martin Uecker wrote: Am Mittwoch, dem 05.07.2023 um 11:11 +0200 schrieb David Brown: On 05/07/2023 10:05, Rafał Pietrak via Gcc wrote: ... In my personal opinion (which you are all free to disregard), named address spaces were an interesting idea that failed.  I was e

Re: wishlist: support for shorter pointers

On 05/07/2023 11:42, Rafał Pietrak via Gcc wrote: Hi, W dniu 5.07.2023 o 11:11, David Brown pisze: On 05/07/2023 10:05, Rafał Pietrak via Gcc wrote: [---] I am not sure if you are clear about this, but the address space definition macros here are for use in the source code for the

Re: wishlist: support for shorter pointers

Thanks David! I do not think I agree with all of it (e.g. sdcc is actively developed with regular releases and supports  tiny devices which are used for extreme low-power  applications) and I do not personally think that only  C++ counts nowadays, especially in the embedded world,  but we do no

Re: wishlist: support for shorter pointers

Hi, W dniu 5.07.2023 o 13:55, David Brown pisze: On 05/07/2023 11:42, Rafał Pietrak via Gcc wrote: [--] Wouldn't it be easier and more natural to make the "named spaces" a synonym to specific linker sections (like section names, or section name prefix when instead of ".data.array.

Re: wishlist: support for shorter pointers

On 05/07/2023 14:25, Rafał Pietrak wrote: Hi, W dniu 5.07.2023 o 13:55, David Brown pisze: On 05/07/2023 11:42, Rafał Pietrak via Gcc wrote: [--] So your current objections to named spaces ... are in fact in favor of them. Isn't it so? Not really, no - I would rather see b

Re: Warning specifically for a returning noreturn

Hi Jonathan, Thanks for the reply, is there a place in gcc's source code I could look at for this? As for the returning an explicit value from noreturn, I'm unfortunately not the one who wrote the code that way; I'm merely a build systems developer trying to get it to work with gcc :/ best regard

Re: [RFC] Bridging the gap between the Linux Kernel Memory Consistency Model (LKMM) and C11/C++11 atomics

On 7/5/23 03:05, Boqun Feng wrote: On Mon, Jul 03, 2023 at 03:20:31PM -0400, Olivier Dion wrote: [...] NOTE: On x86-64, we found at least one corner case [7] with Clang where a RELEASE exchange is optimized to a RELEASE store, when the returned value of the exchange is unused, breaking the above

Re: Warning specifically for a returning noreturn

On Wed, 5 Jul 2023, 14:13 Julian Waters, wrote: > Hi Jonathan, > > Thanks for the reply, is there a place in gcc's source code I could look > at for this? > This is a commit where I added four new warnings, and then changed the code that issues those warnings to use the new OPT_Wxxx variables: h

Re: wishlist: support for shorter pointers

Hi, W dniu 5.07.2023 o 14:57, David Brown pisze: [] My objection to named address spaces stem from two points: 1. They are compiler implementations, not user code (or library code), which means development is inevitably much slower and less flexible. 2. They mix two concepts th

Re: wishlist: support for shorter pointers

On 05/07/2023 15:29, Rafał Pietrak wrote: Hi, W dniu 5.07.2023 o 14:57, David Brown pisze: [] My objection to named address spaces stem from two points: 1. They are compiler implementations, not user code (or library code), which means development is inevitably much slower and l

[RFC] Exposing complex numbers to target backends

Hi, My name is Sylvain, I am an intern at Kalray and I work on improving the GCC backend for the KVX target.  The KVX ISA has dedicated instructions for the handling of complex numbers, which cannot be selected by GCC due to how complex numbers are handled internally.  My goal is to make GCC ab

Re: wishlist: support for shorter pointers

Hi, W dniu 5.07.2023 o 16:45, David Brown pisze: On 05/07/2023 15:29, Rafał Pietrak wrote: [---] OK. I don't see a problem here, but I admit that mixing semantics often lead to problems. I think it also allows better generalisation and flexibility if they are separate.  You mi

Re: Warning specifically for a returning noreturn

On Wed, Jul 5, 2023 at 7:28 AM Jonathan Wakely via Gcc wrote: > > On Wed, 5 Jul 2023 at 12:01, Julian Waters via Gcc wrote: > > > > I see, thanks Andrew. > > > > Anyone else have opinions on this besides Liu or Andrew? The responses have > > been surprisingly quiet thus far > > IMHO all warnings

Re: wishlist: support for shorter pointers

On 05/07/2023 18:13, Rafał Pietrak via Gcc wrote: Hi, W dniu 5.07.2023 o 16:45, David Brown pisze: On 05/07/2023 15:29, Rafał Pietrak wrote: [---] OK. I don't see a problem here, but I admit that mixing semantics often lead to problems. I think it also allows better generalisa

Re: [RFC] Exposing complex numbers to target backends

On 7/5/23 17:12, Sylvain Noiry via Gcc wrote: Hi, My name is Sylvain, I am an intern at Kalray and I work on improving the GCC backend for the KVX target.  The KVX ISA has dedicated instructions for the handling of complex numbers, which cannot be selected by GCC due to how complex numbers a

Stepping down as maintainer for ARC and Epiphany

I haven't worked with these targets in years and can't really do sensible maintenance or reviews of patches for them. I am currently working on optimizations for other ports like RISC-V. ARC has still an active maintainer in Claudiu Zissulescu, so is basically unaffected. I am not aware of any o

Re: Stepping down as maintainer for ARC and Epiphany

On Wed, Jul 5, 2023 at 8:44 PM Joern Rennecke wrote: > > I haven't worked with these targets in years and can't really do sensible > maintenance or reviews of patches for them. > I am currently working on optimizations for other ports like RISC-V. > > ARC has still an active maintainer in Claudiu