On 7 September 2016 at 11:34, Martin Liška <mli...@suse.cz> wrote: > On 09/07/2016 09:45 AM, Christophe Lyon wrote: >> On 6 September 2016 at 15:45, Martin Liška <mli...@suse.cz> wrote: >>> On 09/06/2016 03:31 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: >>>> sizeof (gcov_type) talks about the host gcov type, you want instead the >>>> target gcov type. So >>>> TYPE_SIZE (gcov_type_node) == 32 vs. 64 (or TYPE_SIZE_UNIT (gcov_type_node) >>>> == 4 vs. 8). >>>> As SImode and DImode are in fact 4*BITS_PER_UNIT and 8*BITS_PER_UNIT, >>>> TYPE_SIZE_UNIT comparisons for 4 and 8 are most natural. >>>> And I wouldn't add gcc_unreachable, just warn for weirdo arches always. >>>> >>>> Jakub >>> >>> Thank you Jakub for helping me with that. I've used TYPE_SIZE_UNIT macro. >>> >>> Ready for trunk? >>> Martin >> >> Hi Martin, >> >> On targets which do not support atomic profile update, your patch generates a >> warning on gcc.dg/tree-prof/val-profiler-threads-1.c, making it fail. >> >> Do we need a new effective-target ? >> >> Christophe >> > > Hi. > > Thanks for observation, I'm sending a patch that does that. > Can you please test it? > It does work indeed, thanks. (tested on arm* targets)
Christophe > Thanks, > Martin