Martin Liška writes:
> On 5/21/20 12:11 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>> Yeah, agree it'd be worth having tests for both directions. The patch
>> itself looks good though -- thanks for doing this.
>
> Thanks. There's a version with 2 new tests that I've just tested.
>
> I'm going to install the pa
On 5/21/20 12:11 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
Yeah, agree it'd be worth having tests for both directions. The patch
itself looks good though -- thanks for doing this.
Thanks. There's a version with 2 new tests that I've just tested.
I'm going to install the patch for master. Is it also fine f
Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches writes:
> On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 10:03:37AM +0200, Martin Liška wrote:
>> On 5/21/20 9:56 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> > Can't it be __attribute__((target ("outline-atomics"))) instead?
>>
>> Ah sorry, I wan unclear.
>> It's support the this _target_ attribute which
On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 10:03:37AM +0200, Martin Liška wrote:
> On 5/21/20 9:56 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > Can't it be __attribute__((target ("outline-atomics"))) instead?
>
> Ah sorry, I wan unclear.
> It's support the this _target_ attribute which you mentioned.
Ok, better, will defer review
On 5/21/20 9:56 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Can't it be __attribute__((target ("outline-atomics"))) instead?
Ah sorry, I wan unclear.
It's support the this _target_ attribute which you mentioned.
Martin
On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 09:23:47AM +0200, Martin Liška wrote:
> As mentioned in the ovmf project [1], they would like to have a control
> over the -mno-outline-atomics via a function attribute. They struggle
> with configure detection and this can help them to disable the outlining.
>
> Would it b
