linaro-toolchain

linaro-toolchain@lists.linaro.org

6 participants
5578 discussions

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] 31 patches in gcc: Failure on aarch64

by Christophe Lyon

Sorry, there was a temporary breakage in our CI scripts, you can ignore this bogus report. On Tue, 24 Oct 2023 at 18:25, <ci_notify(a)linaro.org> wrote: > > Dear contributor, our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find some details below. If you have any questions, please follow up on linaro-toolchain(a)lists.linaro.org mailing list, Libera's #linaro-tcwg channel, or ping your favourite Linaro toolchain developer on the usual project channel. > > In gcc_build master-aarch64 after: > > | 31 patches in gcc > | Patchwork URL: https://patchwork.sourceware.org/patch/78409 > | ecdd9931b4f libstdc++: Optimize std::is_pointer compilation performance > | 2d53274d549 c++: Implement __is_pointer built-in trait > | 9414aba0b5b libstdc++: Optimize std::remove_pointer compilation performance > | b0f04909269 c++: Implement __remove_pointer built-in trait > | f5ae5fbcc28 libstdc++: Optimize std::is_object compilation performance > | ... and 26 more patches in gcc > | ... applied on top of baseline commit: > | 326a8c047ec testsuite: Fix gcc.target/arm/mve/mve_vadcq_vsbcq_fpscr_overwrite.c > > Results changed to > # reset_artifacts: > -10 > # true: > 0 > # build_abe gcc: > # FAILED > # First few build errors in logs: > > From > # reset_artifacts: > -10 > # true: > 0 > # build_abe gcc: > 1 > > The configuration of this build is: > CI config tcwg_gcc_build/master-aarch64 > > -----------------8<--------------------------8<--------------------------8<-------------------------- > The information below can be used to reproduce a debug environment: > > Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_build--master-aarch64-precommit/3362/art… > Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_build--master-aarch64-build/1263/artifac…

1 year, 6 months

[Linaro-TCWG-CI] glibc-2.38.9000-193-gb121fdc552: FAIL: 2 regressions on arm

by ci_notify＠linaro.org

Dear contributor, our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find some details below. If you have any questions, please follow up on linaro-toolchain(a)lists.linaro.org mailing list, Libera's #linaro-tcwg channel, or ping your favourite Linaro toolchain developer on the usual project channel. In glibc_check master-arm after: | commit glibc-2.38.9000-193-gb121fdc552 | Author: Arjun Shankar <arjun(a)redhat.com> | Date: Mon Oct 2 14:55:15 2023 +0200 | | Remove 'grp' and merge into 'nss' and 'posix' | | The majority of grp routines are entry points for nss functionality. | This commit removes the 'grp' subdirectory and moves all nss-relevant | functionality and all tests to 'nss', and the 'setgroups' stub into | 'posix' (alongside the 'getgroups' stub). References to grp/ are | accordingly changed. In addition, compat-initgroups.c, a fallback | ... 6 lines of the commit log omitted. FAIL: 2 regressions regressions.sum: === glibc tests === Running glibc:nss ... FAIL: nss/tst-initgroups1 FAIL: nss/tst-initgroups2 === Results Summary === You can find the failure logs in *.log.1.xz files in - https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_glibc_check--master-arm-build/678/artifact/a… . The full lists of regressions and progressions are in - https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_glibc_check--master-arm-build/678/artifact/a… . The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in - https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_glibc_check--master-arm-build/678/artifact/a… . The configuration of this build is: CI config tcwg_glibc_check/master-arm -----------------8<--------------------------8<--------------------------8<-------------------------- The information below can be used to reproduce a debug environment: Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_glibc_check--master-arm-build/678/artifact/a… Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_glibc_check--master-arm-build/676/artifact/a… Reproduce last good and first bad builds: https://git-us.linaro.org/toolchain/ci/interesting-commits.git/plain/glibc/… Full commit : https://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.git;a=commitdiff;h=b121fdc552f392cd86b2… Latest bug report status : https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/GNU-979 List of configurations that regressed due to this commit : * tcwg_glibc_check ** master-arm *** FAIL: 2 regressions *** https://git-us.linaro.org/toolchain/ci/interesting-commits.git/plain/glibc/… *** https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_glibc_check--master-arm-build/678/

1 year, 6 months

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] gcc patch #78468: Failure on aarch64

by Christophe Lyon

Sorry, there was a temporary breakage in our CI scripts, you can ignore this bogus report. On Tue, 24 Oct 2023 at 18:41, <ci_notify(a)linaro.org> wrote: > > Dear contributor, our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find some details below. If you have any questions, please follow up on linaro-toolchain(a)lists.linaro.org mailing list, Libera's #linaro-tcwg channel, or ping your favourite Linaro toolchain developer on the usual project channel. > > In gcc_build master-aarch64 after: > > | gcc patch https://patchwork.sourceware.org/patch/78468 > | Author: Daniil Frolov <exactlywb(a)ispras.ru> > | Date: Tue Oct 24 17:11:24 2023 +0300 > | > | Detecting lifetime-dse issues via Valgrind > | > | PR 66487 is asking to provide sanitizer-like detection for C++ object lifetime > | violations that are worked around with -fno-lifetime-dse in Firefox, LLVM, > | OpenJade. > | > | The discussion in the PR was centered around extending MSan, but MSan was not > | ... 33 lines of the commit log omitted. > | ... applied on top of baseline commit: > | 326a8c047ec testsuite: Fix gcc.target/arm/mve/mve_vadcq_vsbcq_fpscr_overwrite.c > > Results changed to > # reset_artifacts: > -10 > # true: > 0 > # build_abe gcc: > # FAILED > # First few build errors in logs: > > From > # reset_artifacts: > -10 > # true: > 0 > # build_abe gcc: > 1 > > The configuration of this build is: > CI config tcwg_gcc_build/master-aarch64 > > -----------------8<--------------------------8<--------------------------8<-------------------------- > The information below can be used to reproduce a debug environment: > > Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_build--master-aarch64-precommit/3368/art… > Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_build--master-aarch64-build/1263/artifac…

1 year, 6 months

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] gcc patch #78433: FAIL: 1162 regressions on aarch64

by Christophe Lyon

Sorry, there was a temporary breakage in our CI scripts, you can ignore this bogus report. On Tue, 24 Oct 2023 at 18:40, <ci_notify(a)linaro.org> wrote: > > Dear contributor, our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find some details below. If you have any questions, please follow up on linaro-toolchain(a)lists.linaro.org mailing list, Libera's #linaro-tcwg channel, or ping your favourite Linaro toolchain developer on the usual project channel. > > In gcc_check master-aarch64 after: > > | gcc patch https://patchwork.sourceware.org/patch/78433 > | Author: Ajit Agarwal <aagarwa1(a)linux.ibm.com> > | Date: Tue Oct 24 15:01:11 2023 +0530 > | > | ree: Improve ree pass using defined abi interfaces > | > | Hello Vineet, Jeff and Bernhard: > | > | This version 13 of the patch uses abi interfaces to remove zero and sign extension elimination. > | Bootstrapped and regtested on powerpc-linux-gnu. > | > | ... 40 lines of the commit log omitted. > | ... applied on top of baseline commit: > | 0fc13e8c0e3 Improve factor_out_conditional_operation for conversions and constants > > FAIL: 1162 regressions > > regressions.sum: > === g++ tests === > > Running g++:g++.dg/asan/asan.exp ... > FAIL: c-c++-common/asan/alloca_big_alignment.c -O2 output pattern test > FAIL: c-c++-common/asan/alloca_big_alignment.c -O2 -flto -fno-use-linker-plugin -flto-partition=none output pattern test > FAIL: c-c++-common/asan/alloca_detect_custom_size.c -O2 output pattern test > FAIL: c-c++-common/asan/alloca_detect_custom_size.c -O2 -flto -fno-use-linker-plugin -flto-partition=none output pattern test > FAIL: c-c++-common/asan/alloca_detect_custom_size.c -O3 -g output pattern test > FAIL: c-c++-common/asan/alloca_detect_custom_size.c -Os output pattern test > FAIL: c-c++-common/asan/alloca_overflow_partial.c -O2 output pattern test > ... and 1191 more entries > > You can find the failure logs in *.log.1.xz files in > - https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_check--master-aarch64-precommit/3409/art… . > The full lists of regressions and progressions are in > - https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_check--master-aarch64-precommit/3409/art… . > The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in > - https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_check--master-aarch64-precommit/3409/art… . > > The configuration of this build is: > CI config tcwg_gcc_check/master-aarch64 > > -----------------8<--------------------------8<--------------------------8<-------------------------- > The information below can be used to reproduce a debug environment: > > Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_check--master-aarch64-precommit/3409/art… > Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_check--master-aarch64-build/1093/artifac…

1 year, 6 months

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] gcc patch #78469: Failure on aarch64

by Christophe Lyon

Sorry, there was a temporary breakage in our CI scripts, you can ignore this bogus report. On Tue, 24 Oct 2023 at 18:38, <ci_notify(a)linaro.org> wrote: > > Dear contributor, our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find some details below. If you have any questions, please follow up on linaro-toolchain(a)lists.linaro.org mailing list, Libera's #linaro-tcwg channel, or ping your favourite Linaro toolchain developer on the usual project channel. > > In gcc_build master-aarch64 after: > > | gcc patch https://patchwork.sourceware.org/patch/78469 > | Author: Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus <stefansf(a)linux.ibm.com> > | Date: Tue Oct 24 17:26:55 2023 +0200 > | > | testsuite: Fix _BitInt in gcc.misc-tests/godump-1.c > | > | Currently _BitInt is only supported on x86_64 which means that for other > | targets all tests fail with e.g. > | > | gcc.misc-tests/godump-1.c:237:1: sorry, unimplemented: '_BitInt(32)' is not supported on this target > | 237 | _BitInt(32) b32_v; > | ... 12 lines of the commit log omitted. > | ... applied on top of baseline commit: > | 326a8c047ec testsuite: Fix gcc.target/arm/mve/mve_vadcq_vsbcq_fpscr_overwrite.c > > Results changed to > # reset_artifacts: > -10 > # true: > 0 > # build_abe gcc: > # FAILED > # First few build errors in logs: > > From > # reset_artifacts: > -10 > # true: > 0 > # build_abe gcc: > 1 > > The configuration of this build is: > CI config tcwg_gcc_build/master-aarch64 > > -----------------8<--------------------------8<--------------------------8<-------------------------- > The information below can be used to reproduce a debug environment: > > Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_build--master-aarch64-precommit/3369/art… > Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_build--master-aarch64-build/1263/artifac…

1 year, 6 months

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] gcc patch #78466: Failure on aarch64

by Christophe Lyon

Sorry, there was a temporary breakage in our CI scripts, you can ignore this bogus report. On Tue, 24 Oct 2023 at 18:35, <ci_notify(a)linaro.org> wrote: > > Dear contributor, our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find some details below. If you have any questions, please follow up on linaro-toolchain(a)lists.linaro.org mailing list, Libera's #linaro-tcwg channel, or ping your favourite Linaro toolchain developer on the usual project channel. > > In gcc_build master-aarch64 after: > > | gcc patch https://patchwork.sourceware.org/patch/78466 > | Author: Jose E. Marchesi <jose.marchesi(a)oracle.com> > | Date: Tue Oct 24 14:41:13 2023 +0200 > | > | gcov-io.h: fix comment regarding length of records > | > | The length of gcov records is stored as a signed 32-bit number of bytes. > | Ok? > | ... applied on top of baseline commit: > | 326a8c047ec testsuite: Fix gcc.target/arm/mve/mve_vadcq_vsbcq_fpscr_overwrite.c > > Results changed to > # reset_artifacts: > -10 > # true: > 0 > # build_abe gcc: > # FAILED > # First few build errors in logs: > > From > # reset_artifacts: > -10 > # true: > 0 > # build_abe gcc: > 1 > > The configuration of this build is: > CI config tcwg_gcc_build/master-aarch64 > > -----------------8<--------------------------8<--------------------------8<-------------------------- > The information below can be used to reproduce a debug environment: > > Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_build--master-aarch64-precommit/3366/art… > Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_build--master-aarch64-build/1263/artifac…

1 year, 6 months

[Linaro-TCWG-CI] v8.1.0-1799-g38ee0a7dfb: FAIL: 2 regressions on aarch64

by ci_notify＠linaro.org

Dear contributor, our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find some details below. If you have any questions, please follow up on linaro-toolchain(a)lists.linaro.org mailing list, Libera's #linaro-tcwg channel, or ping your favourite Linaro toolchain developer on the usual project channel. In master-aarch64 after: | commit v8.1.0-1799-g38ee0a7dfb | Author: Richard Henderson <richard.henderson(a)linaro.org> | Date: Sat Sep 30 12:05:11 2023 -0700 | | linux-user: Remap guest SIGABRT | | Distinguish host SIGABRT from guest SIGABRT by mapping | the guest signal onto one of the host RT signals. | | This prevents a cycle by which a host assertion failure | is caught and handled by host_signal_handler, queued for | ... 6 lines of the commit log omitted. FAIL: 2 regressions regressions.sum: === libstdc++ tests === Running libstdc++:libstdc++-dg/conformance.exp ... FAIL: 30_threads/condition_variable/members/103382.cc -std=gnu++17 execution test FAIL: 30_threads/thread/native_handle/cancel.cc -std=gnu++17 execution test === Results Summary === You can find the failure logs in *.log.1.xz files in - https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_cross_check_gcc--master-aarch64-build/10… . The full lists of regressions and progressions are in - https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_cross_check_gcc--master-aarch64-build/10… . The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in - https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_cross_check_gcc--master-aarch64-build/10… . The configuration of this build is: CI config tcwg_gnu_cross_check_gcc/master-aarch64 -----------------8<--------------------------8<--------------------------8<-------------------------- The information below can be used to reproduce a debug environment: Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_cross_check_gcc--master-aarch64-build/10… Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_cross_check_gcc--master-aarch64-build/10… Reproduce last good and first bad builds: https://git-us.linaro.org/toolchain/ci/interesting-commits.git/plain/qemu/s… Full commit : https://gitlab.com/qemu-project/qemu/commit/38ee0a7dfb4b15407678df26448e4a1… Latest bug report status : https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/GNU-974 List of configurations that regressed due to this commit : * tcwg_gnu_cross_check_gcc ** master-aarch64 *** FAIL: 2 regressions *** https://git-us.linaro.org/toolchain/ci/interesting-commits.git/plain/qemu/s… *** https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_cross_check_gcc--master-aarch64-build/10…

1 year, 7 months

[ACTIVITY] Report for week #42

by Thiago Jung Bauermann

Hello, # [GNU-767] Support changing SVE vector length in remote debugging - Implemented support for expressing variable-sized vector registers in the XML target description. Now making some changes in GDB's handling of the expedited registers in the remote protocol and adjusting of the g/G packet size. # TCWG CI - Analysed and closed LLVM code size regression GNU-963. -- Thiago

1 year, 7 months

Re: [PATCH v2] ARM: Block predication on atomics [PR111235]

by Ramana Radhakrishnan

+ linaro-toolchain as I don't understand the CI issues on patchwork. On Wed, Sep 27, 2023 at 8:40 PM Wilco Dijkstra <Wilco.Dijkstra(a)arm.com> wrote: > > Hi Ramana, > > > Hope this helps. > > Yes definitely! > > >> Passes regress/bootstrap, OK for commit? > > > > Target ? armhf ? --with-arch , -with-fpu , -with-float parameters ? > > Please be specific. > > I used --target=arm-none-linux-gnueabihf --host=arm-none-linux-gnueabihf > --build=arm-none-linux-gnueabihf --with-float=hard. However it seems that the > default armhf settings are incorrect. I shouldn't need the --with-float=hard since > that is obviously implied by armhf, and they should also imply armv7-a with vfpv3 > according to documentation. It seems to get confused and skip some tests. I tried > using --with-fpu=auto, but that doesn't work at all, so in the end I forced it like: > --with-arch=armv8-a --with-fpu=neon-fp-armv8. With this it runs a few more tests. Yeah that's a wart that I don't like. armhf just implies the hard float ABI and came into being to help distinguish from the Base PCS for some of the distros at the time (2010s). However we didn't want to set a baseline arch at that time given the imminent arrival of v8-a and thus the specification of --with-arch , --with-fpu and --with-float became second nature to many of us working on it at that time. I can see how it can be confusing. With the advent of fpu=auto , I thought this could be made better but that is a matter for another patch and another discussion. However until then do remember to baseline to --with-arch , --with-fpu and --with-float . Unfortunate but needed. If there is a bug with --with-fpu=auto , good to articulate it as I understand that to be the state of the art. Thank you for working through it. > > > Since these patterns touch armv8m.baseline can you find all the > > testcases in the testsuite and ensure no change in code for > > armv8m.baseline as that's unpredicated already and this patch brings > > this in line with the same ? Does the testsuite already cover these > > arch variants and are you satisfied that the tests in the testsuite > > can catch / don't make any additional code changes to the other > > architectures affected by this ? > > There are various v8-m(.base/.main) tests and they all pass. The generated > code is generally unchanged if there was no conditional execution. I made > the new UNSPEC_LDR/STR patterns support offsets so there is no difference > in generated code for relaxed loads/stores (since they used to use a plain > load/store which has an immediate offset). > > >> * onfig/arm/sync.md (arm_atomic_load<mode>): Add new pattern. > > > > Nit: s/onfig/config > > Fixed. Thanks > > >> (atomic_load<mode>): Always expand atomic loads explicitly. > >> (atomic_store<mode>): Always expand atomic stores explicitly. > > > > Nit: Change message to : > > Switch patterns to define_expand. > > Fixed. Thanks. > > > Largely looks ok though I cannot work out tonight if we need more v8-a > > or v8m-baseline specific tests for scan-assembler patterns. > > > > Clearly our testsuite doesn't catch it , so perhaps the OP could help > > validate this patch with their formal models to see if this fixes > > these set of issues and creates no new regressions ? Is that feasible > > to do ? > > Disabling conditional execution avoids the issue. It's trivial to verify that > atomics can no longer be conditionally executed (no "%?"). When this is > committed, we can run the random testing again to confirm the issue > is no longer present. Ok, thanks for promising to do so - I trust you to get it done. Please try out various combinations of -march v7ve, v7-a , v8-a with the tool as each of them have slightly different rules. For instance v7ve allows LDREXD and STREXD to be single copy atomic for 64 bit loads whereas v7-a did not . > > > -(define_insn "atomic_load<mode>" > > - [(set (match_operand:QHSI 0 "register_operand" "=r,r,l") > > +(define_insn "arm_atomic_load<mode>" > > + [(set (match_operand:QHSI 0 "register_operand" "=r,l") > > (unspec_volatile:QHSI > > - [(match_operand:QHSI 1 "arm_sync_memory_operand" "Q,Q,Q") > > - (match_operand:SI 2 "const_int_operand" "n,Pf,n")] ;; model > > + [(match_operand:QHSI 1 "memory_operand" "m,m")] > > > > Remind me again why is it safe to go from the Q constraint to the m > > constraint here and everywhere else you've done this ? > > That's because the relaxed loads/stores use LDR/STR wrapped in an > UNSPEC. To avoid regressions we have to use 'm' so that an immediate > offset can be merged into the memory access. This is because the instructions used here are ldr and str and the use of the 'm' constraint is considered safe. > > >> - VUNSPEC_LDA ; Represent a store-register-acquire. > >> + VUNSPEC_LDR ; Represent a load-register-relaxed. > >> + VUNSPEC_LDA ; Represent a load-register-acquire. > > > > Nit: LDA before LDR ? Though I suspect this list can be alphabetically > > ordered at another point of time. > > Swapped. Thanks > > > There are new tests added for v7-a , what happens with the output for > > v8-a and the changes for ldacq and other such instructions ? > > v7-a and v8-a generate the same instructions for relaxed load/store. > The acquire/release versions are identical except they are no longer > predicated. Basically the new patterns are not only significantly simpler, > they are now the same between the many ARM/Thumb-2/v7-a/v8-m/v8-a > combinations, so test coverage is much higher now. This is how these > patterns should have been designed all along. > > v2 follows below. > > Cheers, > Wilco > > > [PATCH v2] ARM: Block predication on atomics [PR111235] > > The v7 memory ordering model allows reordering of conditional atomic > instructions. To avoid this, make all atomic patterns unconditional. > Expand atomic loads and stores for all architectures so the memory access > can be wrapped into an UNSPEC. > > gcc/ChangeLog/ > PR target/111235 > * config/arm/constraints.md: Remove Pf constraint. > * config/arm/sync.md (arm_atomic_load<mode>): Add new pattern. > (arm_atomic_load_acquire<mode>): Likewise. > (arm_atomic_store<mode>): Likewise. > (arm_atomic_store_release<mode>): Likewise. > (atomic_load<mode>): Switch patterns to define_expand. > (atomic_store<mode>): Likewise. > (arm_atomic_loaddi2_ldrd): Remove predication. > (arm_load_exclusive<mode>): Likewise. > (arm_load_acquire_exclusive<mode>): Likewise. > (arm_load_exclusivesi): Likewise. > (arm_load_acquire_exclusivesi: Likewise. > (arm_load_exclusivedi): Likewise. > (arm_load_acquire_exclusivedi): Likewise. > (arm_store_exclusive<mode>): Likewise. > (arm_store_release_exclusivedi): Likewise. > (arm_store_release_exclusive<mode>): Likewise. > * gcc/config/arm/unspecs.md: Add VUNSPEC_LDR and VUNSPEC_STR. > > gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog/ > PR target/111235 > * gcc.dg/rtl/arm/stl-cond.c: Remove test. > * gcc.target/arm/atomic_loaddi_7.c: Fix dmb count. > * gcc.target/arm/atomic_loaddi_8.c: Likewise. > * gcc.target/arm/pr111235.c: Add new test. > > --- > > diff --git a/gcc/config/arm/constraints.md b/gcc/config/arm/constraints.md > index 05a4ebbdd67601d7b92aa44a619d17634cc69f17..d7c4a1b0cd785f276862048005e6cfa57cdcb20d 100644 > --- a/gcc/config/arm/constraints.md > +++ b/gcc/config/arm/constraints.md > @@ -36,7 +36,7 @@ > ;; in Thumb-1 state: Pa, Pb, Pc, Pd, Pe > ;; in Thumb-2 state: Ha, Pj, PJ, Ps, Pt, Pu, Pv, Pw, Px, Py, Pz, Rd, Rf, Rb, Ra, > ;; Rg, Ri > -;; in all states: Pf, Pg > +;; in all states: Pg > > ;; The following memory constraints have been used: > ;; in ARM/Thumb-2 state: Uh, Ut, Uv, Uy, Un, Um, Us, Up, Uf, Ux, Ul > @@ -239,13 +239,6 @@ (define_constraint "Pe" > (and (match_code "const_int") > (match_test "TARGET_THUMB1 && ival >= 256 && ival <= 510"))) > > -(define_constraint "Pf" > - "Memory models except relaxed, consume or release ones." > - (and (match_code "const_int") > - (match_test "!is_mm_relaxed (memmodel_from_int (ival)) > - && !is_mm_consume (memmodel_from_int (ival)) > - && !is_mm_release (memmodel_from_int (ival))"))) > - > (define_constraint "Pg" > "@internal In Thumb-2 state a constant in range 1 to 32" > (and (match_code "const_int") > diff --git a/gcc/config/arm/sync.md b/gcc/config/arm/sync.md > index 7626bf3c443285dc63b4c4367b11a879a99c93c6..2210810f67f37ce043b8fdc73b4f21b54c5b1912 100644 > --- a/gcc/config/arm/sync.md > +++ b/gcc/config/arm/sync.md > @@ -62,68 +62,110 @@ (define_insn "*memory_barrier" > (set_attr "conds" "unconditional") > (set_attr "predicable" "no")]) > > -(define_insn "atomic_load<mode>" > - [(set (match_operand:QHSI 0 "register_operand" "=r,r,l") > +(define_insn "arm_atomic_load<mode>" > + [(set (match_operand:QHSI 0 "register_operand" "=r,l") > (unspec_volatile:QHSI > - [(match_operand:QHSI 1 "arm_sync_memory_operand" "Q,Q,Q") > - (match_operand:SI 2 "const_int_operand" "n,Pf,n")] ;; model > + [(match_operand:QHSI 1 "memory_operand" "m,m")] > + VUNSPEC_LDR))] > + "" > + "ldr<sync_sfx>\t%0, %1" > + [(set_attr "arch" "32,any")]) > + > +(define_insn "arm_atomic_load_acquire<mode>" > + [(set (match_operand:QHSI 0 "register_operand" "=r") > + (unspec_volatile:QHSI > + [(match_operand:QHSI 1 "arm_sync_memory_operand" "Q")] > VUNSPEC_LDA))] > "TARGET_HAVE_LDACQ" > - { > - if (aarch_mm_needs_acquire (operands[2])) > - { > - if (TARGET_THUMB1) > - return "lda<sync_sfx>\t%0, %1"; > - else > - return "lda<sync_sfx>%?\t%0, %1"; > - } > - else > - { > - if (TARGET_THUMB1) > - return "ldr<sync_sfx>\t%0, %1"; > - else > - return "ldr<sync_sfx>%?\t%0, %1"; > - } > - } > - [(set_attr "arch" "32,v8mb,any") > - (set_attr "predicable" "yes")]) > + "lda<sync_sfx>\t%0, %C1" > +) > > -(define_insn "atomic_store<mode>" > - [(set (match_operand:QHSI 0 "memory_operand" "=Q,Q,Q") > +(define_insn "arm_atomic_store<mode>" > + [(set (match_operand:QHSI 0 "memory_operand" "=m,m") > + (unspec_volatile:QHSI > + [(match_operand:QHSI 1 "register_operand" "r,l")] > + VUNSPEC_STR))] > + "" > + "str<sync_sfx>\t%1, %0"; > + [(set_attr "arch" "32,any")]) > + > +(define_insn "arm_atomic_store_release<mode>" > + [(set (match_operand:QHSI 0 "arm_sync_memory_operand" "=Q") > (unspec_volatile:QHSI > - [(match_operand:QHSI 1 "general_operand" "r,r,l") > - (match_operand:SI 2 "const_int_operand" "n,Pf,n")] ;; model > + [(match_operand:QHSI 1 "register_operand" "r")] > VUNSPEC_STL))] > "TARGET_HAVE_LDACQ" > - { > - if (aarch_mm_needs_release (operands[2])) > - { > - if (TARGET_THUMB1) > - return "stl<sync_sfx>\t%1, %0"; > - else > - return "stl<sync_sfx>%?\t%1, %0"; > - } > - else > - { > - if (TARGET_THUMB1) > - return "str<sync_sfx>\t%1, %0"; > - else > - return "str<sync_sfx>%?\t%1, %0"; > - } > - } > - [(set_attr "arch" "32,v8mb,any") > - (set_attr "predicable" "yes")]) > + "stl<sync_sfx>\t%1, %C0") > + > + > +(define_expand "atomic_load<mode>" > + [(match_operand:QHSI 0 "register_operand") ;; val out > + (match_operand:QHSI 1 "arm_sync_memory_operand") ;; memory > + (match_operand:SI 2 "const_int_operand")] ;; model > + "" > +{ > + memmodel model = memmodel_from_int (INTVAL (operands[2])); > + > + if (TARGET_HAVE_LDACQ && !is_mm_relaxed (model)) > + { > + emit_insn (gen_arm_atomic_load_acquire<mode> (operands[0], operands[1])); > + DONE; > + } > + > + /* The seq_cst model needs a barrier before the load to block reordering with > + earlier accesses. */ > + if (is_mm_seq_cst (model)) > + expand_mem_thread_fence (model); > + > + emit_insn (gen_arm_atomic_load<mode> (operands[0], operands[1])); > + > + /* All non-relaxed models need a barrier after the load when load-acquire > + instructions are not available. */ > + if (!is_mm_relaxed (model)) > + expand_mem_thread_fence (model); > + > + DONE; > +}) > + > +(define_expand "atomic_store<mode>" > + [(match_operand:QHSI 0 "arm_sync_memory_operand") ;; memory > + (match_operand:QHSI 1 "register_operand") ;; store value > + (match_operand:SI 2 "const_int_operand")] ;; model > + "" > +{ > + memmodel model = memmodel_from_int (INTVAL (operands[2])); > + > + if (TARGET_HAVE_LDACQ && !is_mm_relaxed (model)) > + { > + emit_insn (gen_arm_atomic_store_release<mode> (operands[0], operands[1])); > + DONE; > + } > + > + /* All non-relaxed models need a barrier after the load when load-acquire > + instructions are not available. */ > + if (!is_mm_relaxed (model)) > + expand_mem_thread_fence (model); > + > + emit_insn (gen_arm_atomic_store<mode> (operands[0], operands[1])); > + > + /* The seq_cst model needs a barrier after the store to block reordering with > + later accesses. */ > + if (is_mm_seq_cst (model)) > + expand_mem_thread_fence (model); > + > + DONE; > +}) > > ;; An LDRD instruction usable by the atomic_loaddi expander on LPAE targets > > (define_insn "arm_atomic_loaddi2_ldrd" > [(set (match_operand:DI 0 "register_operand" "=r") > (unspec_volatile:DI > - [(match_operand:DI 1 "arm_sync_memory_operand" "Q")] > + [(match_operand:DI 1 "memory_operand" "m")] > VUNSPEC_LDRD_ATOMIC))] > "ARM_DOUBLEWORD_ALIGN && TARGET_HAVE_LPAE" > - "ldrd%?\t%0, %H0, %C1" > - [(set_attr "predicable" "yes")]) > + "ldrd\t%0, %H0, %1" > +) > > ;; There are three ways to expand this depending on the architecture > ;; features available. As for the barriers, a load needs a barrier > @@ -152,6 +194,11 @@ (define_expand "atomic_loaddi" > DONE; > } > > + /* The seq_cst model needs a barrier before the load to block reordering with > + earlier accesses. */ > + if (is_mm_seq_cst (model)) > + expand_mem_thread_fence (model); > + > /* On LPAE targets LDRD and STRD accesses to 64-bit aligned > locations are 64-bit single-copy atomic. We still need barriers in the > appropriate places to implement the ordering constraints. */ > @@ -160,7 +207,6 @@ (define_expand "atomic_loaddi" > else > emit_insn (gen_arm_load_exclusivedi (operands[0], operands[1])); > > - > /* All non-relaxed models need a barrier after the load when load-acquire > instructions are not available. */ > if (!is_mm_relaxed (model)) > @@ -446,54 +492,42 @@ (define_insn_and_split "atomic_nand_fetch<mode>" > [(set_attr "arch" "32,v8mb")]) > > (define_insn "arm_load_exclusive<mode>" > - [(set (match_operand:SI 0 "s_register_operand" "=r,r") > + [(set (match_operand:SI 0 "s_register_operand" "=r") > (zero_extend:SI > (unspec_volatile:NARROW > - [(match_operand:NARROW 1 "mem_noofs_operand" "Ua,Ua")] > + [(match_operand:NARROW 1 "mem_noofs_operand" "Ua")] > VUNSPEC_LL)))] > "TARGET_HAVE_LDREXBH" > - "@ > - ldrex<sync_sfx>%?\t%0, %C1 > - ldrex<sync_sfx>\t%0, %C1" > - [(set_attr "arch" "32,v8mb") > - (set_attr "predicable" "yes")]) > + "ldrex<sync_sfx>\t%0, %C1" > +) > > (define_insn "arm_load_acquire_exclusive<mode>" > - [(set (match_operand:SI 0 "s_register_operand" "=r,r") > + [(set (match_operand:SI 0 "s_register_operand" "=r") > (zero_extend:SI > (unspec_volatile:NARROW > - [(match_operand:NARROW 1 "mem_noofs_operand" "Ua,Ua")] > + [(match_operand:NARROW 1 "mem_noofs_operand" "Ua")] > VUNSPEC_LAX)))] > "TARGET_HAVE_LDACQ" > - "@ > - ldaex<sync_sfx>%?\\t%0, %C1 > - ldaex<sync_sfx>\\t%0, %C1" > - [(set_attr "arch" "32,v8mb") > - (set_attr "predicable" "yes")]) > + "ldaex<sync_sfx>\\t%0, %C1" > +) > > (define_insn "arm_load_exclusivesi" > - [(set (match_operand:SI 0 "s_register_operand" "=r,r") > + [(set (match_operand:SI 0 "s_register_operand" "=r") > (unspec_volatile:SI > - [(match_operand:SI 1 "mem_noofs_operand" "Ua,Ua")] > + [(match_operand:SI 1 "mem_noofs_operand" "Ua")] > VUNSPEC_LL))] > "TARGET_HAVE_LDREX" > - "@ > - ldrex%?\t%0, %C1 > - ldrex\t%0, %C1" > - [(set_attr "arch" "32,v8mb") > - (set_attr "predicable" "yes")]) > + "ldrex\t%0, %C1" > +) > > (define_insn "arm_load_acquire_exclusivesi" > - [(set (match_operand:SI 0 "s_register_operand" "=r,r") > + [(set (match_operand:SI 0 "s_register_operand" "=r") > (unspec_volatile:SI > - [(match_operand:SI 1 "mem_noofs_operand" "Ua,Ua")] > + [(match_operand:SI 1 "mem_noofs_operand" "Ua")] > VUNSPEC_LAX))] > "TARGET_HAVE_LDACQ" > - "@ > - ldaex%?\t%0, %C1 > - ldaex\t%0, %C1" > - [(set_attr "arch" "32,v8mb") > - (set_attr "predicable" "yes")]) > + "ldaex\t%0, %C1" > +) > > (define_insn "arm_load_exclusivedi" > [(set (match_operand:DI 0 "s_register_operand" "=r") > @@ -501,8 +535,8 @@ (define_insn "arm_load_exclusivedi" > [(match_operand:DI 1 "mem_noofs_operand" "Ua")] > VUNSPEC_LL))] > "TARGET_HAVE_LDREXD" > - "ldrexd%?\t%0, %H0, %C1" > - [(set_attr "predicable" "yes")]) > + "ldrexd\t%0, %H0, %C1" > +) > > (define_insn "arm_load_acquire_exclusivedi" > [(set (match_operand:DI 0 "s_register_operand" "=r") > @@ -510,8 +544,8 @@ (define_insn "arm_load_acquire_exclusivedi" > [(match_operand:DI 1 "mem_noofs_operand" "Ua")] > VUNSPEC_LAX))] > "TARGET_HAVE_LDACQEXD && ARM_DOUBLEWORD_ALIGN" > - "ldaexd%?\t%0, %H0, %C1" > - [(set_attr "predicable" "yes")]) > + "ldaexd\t%0, %H0, %C1" > +) > > (define_insn "arm_store_exclusive<mode>" > [(set (match_operand:SI 0 "s_register_operand" "=&r") > @@ -530,14 +564,11 @@ (define_insn "arm_store_exclusive<mode>" > Note that the 1st register always gets the > lowest word in memory. */ > gcc_assert ((REGNO (operands[2]) & 1) == 0 || TARGET_THUMB2); > - return "strexd%?\t%0, %2, %H2, %C1"; > + return "strexd\t%0, %2, %H2, %C1"; > } > - if (TARGET_THUMB1) > - return "strex<sync_sfx>\t%0, %2, %C1"; > - else > - return "strex<sync_sfx>%?\t%0, %2, %C1"; > + return "strex<sync_sfx>\t%0, %2, %C1"; > } > - [(set_attr "predicable" "yes")]) > +) > > (define_insn "arm_store_release_exclusivedi" > [(set (match_operand:SI 0 "s_register_operand" "=&r") > @@ -550,20 +581,16 @@ (define_insn "arm_store_release_exclusivedi" > { > /* See comment in arm_store_exclusive<mode> above. */ > gcc_assert ((REGNO (operands[2]) & 1) == 0 || TARGET_THUMB2); > - return "stlexd%?\t%0, %2, %H2, %C1"; > + return "stlexd\t%0, %2, %H2, %C1"; > } > - [(set_attr "predicable" "yes")]) > +) > > (define_insn "arm_store_release_exclusive<mode>" > - [(set (match_operand:SI 0 "s_register_operand" "=&r,&r") > + [(set (match_operand:SI 0 "s_register_operand" "=&r") > (unspec_volatile:SI [(const_int 0)] VUNSPEC_SLX)) > - (set (match_operand:QHSI 1 "mem_noofs_operand" "=Ua,Ua") > + (set (match_operand:QHSI 1 "mem_noofs_operand" "=Ua") > (unspec_volatile:QHSI > - [(match_operand:QHSI 2 "s_register_operand" "r,r")] > + [(match_operand:QHSI 2 "s_register_operand" "r")] > VUNSPEC_SLX))] > "TARGET_HAVE_LDACQ" > - "@ > - stlex<sync_sfx>%?\t%0, %2, %C1 > - stlex<sync_sfx>\t%0, %2, %C1" > - [(set_attr "arch" "32,v8mb") > - (set_attr "predicable" "yes")]) > + "stlex<sync_sfx>\t%0, %2, %C1") > diff --git a/gcc/config/arm/unspecs.md b/gcc/config/arm/unspecs.md > index 6a5b1f8f623b00dc014c9f829c591477f8faa9a1..4713ec840abae48ca70f418dbc0d4028ad4ad527 100644 > --- a/gcc/config/arm/unspecs.md > +++ b/gcc/config/arm/unspecs.md > @@ -221,8 +221,10 @@ (define_c_enum "unspecv" [ > VUNSPEC_SC ; Represent a store-register-exclusive. > VUNSPEC_LAX ; Represent a load-register-acquire-exclusive. > VUNSPEC_SLX ; Represent a store-register-release-exclusive. > - VUNSPEC_LDA ; Represent a store-register-acquire. > + VUNSPEC_LDA ; Represent a load-register-acquire. > + VUNSPEC_LDR ; Represent a load-register-relaxed. > VUNSPEC_STL ; Represent a store-register-release. > + VUNSPEC_STR ; Represent a store-register-relaxed. > VUNSPEC_GET_FPSCR ; Represent fetch of FPSCR content. > VUNSPEC_SET_FPSCR ; Represent assign of FPSCR content. > VUNSPEC_SET_FPSCR_NZCVQC ; Represent assign of FPSCR_nzcvqc content. > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/rtl/arm/stl-cond.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/rtl/arm/stl-cond.c > deleted file mode 100644 > index e47ca6bf36dac500b90d80e52e150a19c95c7219..0000000000000000000000000000000000000000 > --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/rtl/arm/stl-cond.c > +++ /dev/null > @@ -1,61 +0,0 @@ > -/* { dg-do compile { target arm*-*-* } } */ > -/* { dg-require-effective-target arm_arm_ok } */ > -/* { dg-require-effective-target arm_arch_v8a_ok } */ > -/* { dg-options "-O2 -marm" } */ > -/* { dg-add-options arm_arch_v8a } */ > - > -/* We want to test that the STL instruction gets the conditional > - suffix when under a COND_EXEC. However, COND_EXEC is very hard to > - generate from C code because the atomic_store expansion adds a compiler > - barrier before the insn, preventing if-conversion. So test the output > - here with a hand-crafted COND_EXEC wrapped around an STL. */ > - > -void __RTL (startwith ("final")) foo (int *a, int b) > -{ > -(function "foo" > - (param "a" > - (DECL_RTL (reg/v:SI r0)) > - (DECL_RTL_INCOMING (reg:SI r0)) > - ) > - (param "b" > - (DECL_RTL (reg/v:SI r1)) > - (DECL_RTL_INCOMING (reg:SI r1)) > - ) > - (insn-chain > - (block 2 > - (edge-from entry (flags "FALLTHRU")) > - (cnote 5 [bb 2] NOTE_INSN_BASIC_BLOCK) > - > - (insn:TI 7 (parallel [ > - (set (reg:CC cc) > - (compare:CC (reg:SI r1) > - (const_int 0))) > - (set (reg/v:SI r1) > - (reg:SI r1 )) > - ]) ;; {*movsi_compare0} > - (nil)) > - > - ;; A conditional atomic store-release: STLNE for Armv8-A. > - (insn 10 (cond_exec (ne (reg:CC cc) > - (const_int 0)) > - (set (mem/v:SI (reg/v/f:SI r0) [-1 S4 A32]) > - (unspec_volatile:SI [ > - (reg/v:SI r1) > - (const_int 3) > - ] VUNSPEC_STL))) ;; {*p atomic_storesi} > - (expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg:CC cc) > - (expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg/v:SI r1) > - (expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg/v/f:SI r0) > - (nil))))) > - (edge-to exit (flags "FALLTHRU")) > - ) ;; block 2 > - ) ;; insn-chain > - (crtl > - (return_rtx > - (reg/i:SI r0) > - ) ;; return_rtx > - ) ;; crtl > -) ;; function > -} > - > -/* { dg-final { scan-assembler "stlne" } } */ > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/atomic_loaddi_7.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/atomic_loaddi_7.c > index 6743663f1e6831d3fc441e80fcfe3d761987970b..79e36edbb8fa86712b8d283b9a81b794610f4813 100644 > --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/atomic_loaddi_7.c > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/atomic_loaddi_7.c > @@ -6,4 +6,4 @@ > #include "atomic_loaddi_seq_cst.x" > > /* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "ldrexd\tr\[0-9\]+, r\[0-9\]+, \\\[r\[0-9\]+\\\]" 1 } } */ > -/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "dmb\tish" 1 } } */ > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "dmb\tish" 2 } } */ > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/atomic_loaddi_8.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/atomic_loaddi_8.c > index f7bd3e5a2b515d91418f5f4a7a8db00336a8b594..7241d361313997b0133056c1a3a7c1b546708e43 100644 > --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/atomic_loaddi_8.c > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/atomic_loaddi_8.c > @@ -6,4 +6,4 @@ > #include "atomic_loaddi_seq_cst.x" > > /* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "ldrd\tr\[0-9\]+, r\[0-9\]+, \\\[r\[0-9\]+\\\]" 1 } } */ > -/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "dmb\tish" 1 } } */ > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "dmb\tish" 2 } } */ > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr111235.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr111235.c > new file mode 100644 > index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b06a5bfb8e294edf04ec9b7b6d8fe5d1ac73b1e7 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr111235.c > @@ -0,0 +1,39 @@ > +/* { dg-do compile } */ > +/* { dg-options "-O2" } */ > +/* { dg-require-effective-target arm_arch_v7a_ok } */ > +/* { dg-add-options arm_arch_v7a } */ > + > +#include <stdatomic.h> > + > +int t0 (int *p, int x) > +{ > + if (x > 100) > + x = atomic_load_explicit (p, memory_order_relaxed); > + return x + 1; > +} > + > +long long t1 (long long *p, int x) > +{ > + if (x > 100) > + x = atomic_load_explicit (p, memory_order_relaxed); > + return x + 1; > +} > + > +void t2 (int *p, int x) > +{ > + if (x > 100) > + atomic_store_explicit (p, x, memory_order_relaxed); > +} > + > +void t3 (long long *p, int x) > +{ > + if (x > 100) > + atomic_store_explicit (p, x, memory_order_relaxed); > +} > + > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "ldrexd\tr\[0-9\]+, r\[0-9\]+, \\\[r\[0-9\]+\\\]" 2 } } */ > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "ldrgt" } } */ > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "ldrdgt" } } */ > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "ldrexdgt" } } */ > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "strgt" } } */ > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "strdgt" } } */ Ok if no regressions but as you might get nagged by the post commit CI ... While it is not policy yet to look at these bots but given the enthusiasm at Cauldron for patchwork and pre-commit CI and because all my armhf boxes are boxed up, I decided to do something a bit novel ! I tried reviewing this via patchwork https://patchwork.sourceware.org/project/gcc/patch/PAWPR08MB8982A6AA40749B7… and notice that https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_build--master-arm-precommit/2393/artifac… says nothing could be built. Possibly worth double checking the status for it being a false negative as to why the build failed. It was green on patchwork but remembering that Green is not Green for CI in patchwork I clicked on the afore mentioned ci.linaro.org link and see that it's actually broken. regards Ramana

1 year, 7 months

[ACTIVITY] report week ending 20 Oct

by Peter Maydell

Progress: * UM-2 [QEMU upstream maintainership] - post-holiday catchup on email and code review - respin and resend of a patch fixing a bug in rdma code - sent a target-arm pull request * QEMU-292 [ARMv8.3 FEAT_NV, Nested Virtualization] - did an initial read-through of the relevant portions of the Arm ARM to identify the work required here thanks -- PMM

1 year, 7 months

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

linaro-toolchain