On Fri, 30 Aug 2013, Dominique Dhumieres wrote:
>> Committed as r202101.
> This cause a bootstrap failure:
> on x86_64-apple-darwin10.
And FreeBSD. Your fix also restored bootstrap there. Thanks
for the quick reaction, and to Dominique and Rainer for their
reports.
Gerald
On Fri, 2013-08-30 at 16:49 +0200, Rainer Orth wrote:
> Torvald Riegel writes:
>
> > On Mon, 2013-08-26 at 09:49 -0700, Richard Henderson wrote:
> >> On 08/22/2013 02:57 PM, Torvald Riegel wrote:
> >> > On Thu, 2013-08-22 at 12:05 -0700, Richard Henderson wrote:
> >> >> On 08/22/2013 11:39 AM, To
> Committed as r202101.
This cause a bootstrap failure:
...
libtool: compile: /opt/gcc/build_w/./gcc/xg++ -B/opt/gcc/build_w/./gcc/
-nostdinc++ -nostdinc++
-I/opt/gcc/build_w/x86_64-apple-darwin10.8.0/libstdc++-v3/include/x86_64-apple-darwin10.8.0
-I/opt/gcc/build_w/x86_64-apple-darwin10.8.0/
Torvald Riegel writes:
> On Mon, 2013-08-26 at 09:49 -0700, Richard Henderson wrote:
>> On 08/22/2013 02:57 PM, Torvald Riegel wrote:
>> > On Thu, 2013-08-22 at 12:05 -0700, Richard Henderson wrote:
>> >> On 08/22/2013 11:39 AM, Torvald Riegel wrote:
>> >>> +/* Store edi for future HTM fa
On Mon, 2013-08-26 at 09:49 -0700, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 08/22/2013 02:57 PM, Torvald Riegel wrote:
> > On Thu, 2013-08-22 at 12:05 -0700, Richard Henderson wrote:
> >> On 08/22/2013 11:39 AM, Torvald Riegel wrote:
> >>> + /* Store edi for future HTM fast path retries. We use a stack slot
On 08/22/2013 02:57 PM, Torvald Riegel wrote:
> On Thu, 2013-08-22 at 12:05 -0700, Richard Henderson wrote:
>> On 08/22/2013 11:39 AM, Torvald Riegel wrote:
>>> + /* Store edi for future HTM fast path retries. We use a stack slot
>>> + lower than the jmpbuf so that the jmpbuf's rip field wi
On Thu, 2013-08-22 at 12:05 -0700, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 08/22/2013 11:39 AM, Torvald Riegel wrote:
> > + /* Store edi for future HTM fast path retries. We use a stack slot
> > + lower than the jmpbuf so that the jmpbuf's rip field will overlap
> > + with the proper return addr
On 08/22/2013 11:39 AM, Torvald Riegel wrote:
> + /* Store edi for future HTM fast path retries. We use a stack slot
> +lower than the jmpbuf so that the jmpbuf's rip field will overlap
> +with the proper return address on the stack. */
> + movl%edi, -64(%rsp)
You hav
Attached is an updated patch. Changes explained below.
On Wed, 2013-08-21 at 10:50 -0700, Richard Henderson wrote:
> > -#if defined(USE_HTM_FASTPATH) && !defined(HTM_CUSTOM_FASTPATH)
> > +#ifdef USE_HTM_FASTPATH
> >// HTM fastpath. Only chosen in the absence of transaction_cancel to
> > all
On 08/21/2013 10:14 AM, Andi Kleen wrote:
> The rest seems reasonable to me, although I haven't tried to untangle
> the full dependencies between C++ and asm code for retries.
> It would be likely cleaner to just keep the retries fully
> in C++ like the original patch did. There's no advantage
> of
On Wed, 2013-08-21 at 19:41 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > That's true for x86, but it seems that for s390, we can't easily put the
> > xbegin/tbegin into the C++ code because of floating point register
> > save/restore issues. The added complexity on the x86 side seemed to be
> > a reasonable price
> -#if defined(USE_HTM_FASTPATH) && !defined(HTM_CUSTOM_FASTPATH)
> +#ifdef USE_HTM_FASTPATH
>// HTM fastpath. Only chosen in the absence of transaction_cancel to allow
>// using an uninstrumented code path.
>// The fastpath is enabled only by dispatch_htm's method group, which uses
>
> That's true for x86, but it seems that for s390, we can't easily put the
> xbegin/tbegin into the C++ code because of floating point register
> save/restore issues. The added complexity on the x86 side seemed to be
> a reasonable price for having a general HTM fast path retry handling on
> the C
On Wed, 2013-08-21 at 10:14 -0700, Andi Kleen wrote:
> Torvald Riegel writes:
> > +#endif
> > leaq8(%rsp), %rax
> > - subq$56, %rsp
> > - cfi_def_cfa_offset(64)
> > + subq$64, %rsp
> > + cfi_def_cfa_offset(72)
>
> I don't see why you did this change and the addq change bel
Torvald Riegel writes:
> +#endif
> leaq8(%rsp), %rax
> - subq$56, %rsp
> - cfi_def_cfa_offset(64)
> + subq$64, %rsp
> + cfi_def_cfa_offset(72)
I don't see why you did this change and the addq change below.
The rest seems reasonable to me, although I haven't trie
This patch adds a custom HTM fast path for RTM on x86_64, which moves
the core HTM fast path bits from gtm_thread::begin_transaction into the
x86-specific ITM_beginTransaction implementation. It extends/changes
the previous patch by Andi:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-01/msg01228.html
Th
16 matches
Mail list logo
