From: Kumba <kumba@gentoo.org>
To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Cc: Linux MIPS List <linux-mips@linux-mips.org>, rdsandiford@googlemail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH]: R10000 Needs LL/SC Workaround in Gcc
Date: Sat, 01 Nov 2008 14:49:44 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <490CA4C8.40904@gentoo.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87abcjibsl.fsf@firetop.home>
Richard Sandiford wrote:
>
> As Maciej said, this should really be controlled by an -mfix-r10000
> command-line option, not by the _MIPS_ARCH_* macro. (In this context,
> _MIPS_ARCH_* is a property of the compiler that you're using to build
> gcc itself.)
>
> There are two ways we could handle this:
>
> - Make -mfix-r10000 require -mbranch-likely. (It mustn't _imply_
> -mbranch-likely. It should simply check that -mbranch-likely is
> already in effect.)
>
> - Make -mfix-r10000 insert nops when -mbranch-likely is not in effect.
Does using -mbranch-likely change the output of those specific asm commands that
my original patch was altering? Or will -mfix-r10000 need to not only check the
status of -mbranch-likely and set it if not set, but also need to modify the
referenced beq/beqzl sets in mips.h?
If so, I assume a test for both TARGET_FIX_R10000 and TARGET_BRANCHLIKELY would
be needed, and then if TARGET_BRANCHLIKELY doesn't exist, but TARGET_FIX_R10000
is, insert 28 nops before beq. Sound correct?
On setting -mbranch-likely, I found what I think is the appropriate section in
mips.c around Line 13810:
/* If neither -mbranch-likely nor -mno-branch-likely was given
on the command line, set MASK_BRANCHLIKELY based on the target
architecture and tuning flags. Annulled delay slots are a
size win, so we only consider the processor-specific tuning
for !optimize_size. */
if ((target_flags_explicit & MASK_BRANCHLIKELY) == 0)
{
if (ISA_HAS_BRANCHLIKELY
&& (optimize_size
|| (mips_tune_info->tune_flags & PTF_AVOID_BRANCHLIKELY) == 0))
target_flags |= MASK_BRANCHLIKELY;
else
target_flags &= ~MASK_BRANCHLIKELY;
}
else if (TARGET_BRANCHLIKELY && !ISA_HAS_BRANCHLIKELY)
warning (0, "the %qs architecture does not support branch-likely"
" instructions", mips_arch_info->name);
I'm kind of thinking that the -mfix-r10000 setting to include -mbranch-likely
would fit here (Assuming this is what can enable/disable that option via
MASK_BRANCHLIKELY), but if I'm reading it right, optimizing for size disables
brach-likely instructions. Shouldn't -mfix-r10000 override that?
Would an equivalent conditional like this be close?:
if (ISA_HAS_BRANCHLIKELY
&& ((optimize_size || TARGET_FIX_R10000)
|| (mips_tune_info->tune_flags & PTF_AVOID_BRANCHLIKELY) == 0))
Also, does anyone have a copy of the R10000 Silicon Errata documentation kicking
around? Thiemo brought up a point that we may need ssnop instead of nop, but
I'd need to check the errata for that, and that doesn't seem to exist anywhere
anymore. I found an old link to it on MIPS' site, but nothing else. I've only
got Vr10000 manuals from SGI and NEC, and they don't seem to cover
revision-specific errata any.
Thanks!
--
Joshua Kinard
Gentoo/MIPS
kumba@gentoo.org
"The past tempts us, the present confuses us, the future frightens us. And our
lives slip away, moment by moment, lost in that vast, terrible in-between."
--Emperor Turhan, Centauri Republic
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-11-01 18:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-10-31 5:00 [PATCH]: R10000 Needs LL/SC Workaround in Gcc Kumba
2008-10-31 14:24 ` Maciej W. Rozycki
2008-11-01 7:30 ` Kumba
2008-11-01 17:41 ` Richard Sandiford
2008-11-01 18:49 ` Kumba [this message]
2008-11-01 19:42 ` Richard Sandiford
2008-11-02 0:00 ` Kumba
2008-11-02 10:00 ` Richard Sandiford
2008-11-03 9:01 ` Kumba
2008-11-03 20:47 ` Richard Sandiford
2008-11-04 0:04 ` Ralf Baechle
2008-11-04 7:14 ` Kumba
2008-11-04 9:04 ` Ralf Baechle
2008-11-04 14:26 ` Maciej W. Rozycki
2008-11-04 14:31 ` Ralf Baechle
2008-11-04 14:23 ` Maciej W. Rozycki
2008-11-08 9:37 ` Richard Sandiford
2008-11-08 18:20 ` Markus Gothe
2008-11-10 6:09 ` Kumba
2008-11-11 23:13 ` Richard Sandiford
2008-11-11 23:28 ` Richard Sandiford
2008-11-11 23:40 ` Maciej W. Rozycki
2008-11-12 7:42 ` Kumba
2008-11-13 23:10 ` Richard Sandiford
2008-11-14 8:14 ` Kumba
2008-11-15 14:28 ` Richard Sandiford
2008-11-16 7:35 ` Kumba
2008-11-02 10:49 ` Maciej W. Rozycki
2008-11-02 11:34 ` Richard Sandiford
2008-11-03 16:51 ` Paul_Koning
2008-11-03 16:51 ` Paul_Koning
2008-11-03 16:59 ` Maciej W. Rozycki
2008-11-03 17:35 ` Ralf Baechle
2008-11-01 20:33 ` Maciej W. Rozycki
2008-11-01 23:45 ` Ralf Baechle
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=490CA4C8.40904@gentoo.org \
--to=kumba@gentoo.org \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=linux-mips@linux-mips.org \
--cc=rdsandiford@googlemail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox