https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52941
--- Comment #20 from Oleg Endo ---
Thanks for the reminder. The issue hasn't been fully resolved. Please leave
this PR open. This will be helpful when getting back to the issue.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52941
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #19
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52941
--- Comment #18 from Oleg Endo ---
Author: olegendo
Date: Wed Oct 8 23:17:42 2014
New Revision: 216020
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=216020&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
Backport from mainline
2014-10-08 Oleg Endo
PR target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52941
--- Comment #17 from Oleg Endo ---
Author: olegendo
Date: Wed Oct 8 23:15:44 2014
New Revision: 216019
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=216019&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
Backport from mainline
2014-10-08 Oleg Endo
PR target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52941
--- Comment #16 from Oleg Endo ---
Author: olegendo
Date: Wed Oct 8 23:13:02 2014
New Revision: 216018
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=216018&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
PR target/52941
* config/sh/sync.md (atomic_exchangesi_hard,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52941
--- Comment #15 from Oleg Endo ---
(In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #14)
> Hm, maybe it would make sense to add a target specific option to allow
> setting set the minimum atomic variable alignment (MINIMUM_ATOMIC_ALIGNMENT
> macro).
The macro
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52941
--- Comment #14 from Oleg Endo ---
Hm, maybe it would make sense to add a target specific option to allow setting
set the minimum atomic variable alignment (MINIMUM_ATOMIC_ALIGNMENT macro). If
set to 32 bit, movco.l and movli.l insns can be used
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52941
--- Comment #13 from Oleg Endo 2012-06-16
08:30:34 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #12)
> Probably, you should update libjava/sysdep/sh/locks.h as well.
Just for the record, this was fixed by:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-06/msg00971.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52941
--- Comment #12 from Uros Bizjak 2012-06-14 09:26:33
UTC ---
Probably, you should update libjava/sysdep/sh/locks.h as well.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52941
--- Comment #11 from Oleg Endo 2012-05-29
20:26:46 UTC ---
Author: olegendo
Date: Tue May 29 20:26:41 2012
New Revision: 187987
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=187987
Log:
PR target/52941
* config/sh/predicates.md (
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52941
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #27173|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52941
--- Comment #9 from Oleg Endo 2012-04-30 19:16:31
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> (In reply to comment #7)
> > Created attachment 27173 [details]
> > Proposed patch
>
> Looks even better.
>
> > Only one thing ... is it safe to do the
> > "@-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52941
--- Comment #8 from Kazumoto Kojima 2012-04-17
00:54:00 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> Created attachment 27173 [details]
> Proposed patch
Looks even better.
> Only one thing ... is it safe to do the
> "@-r15", "@+r15" stuff in the atomic s
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52941
--- Comment #7 from Oleg Endo 2012-04-17 00:03:19
UTC ---
Created attachment 27173
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27173
Proposed patch
(In reply to comment #6)
> The patch looks just fine. I don't mind whether those atomics
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52941
--- Comment #6 from Kazumoto Kojima 2012-04-16
22:37:31 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
The patch looks just fine. I don't mind whether those atomics are
fully optimized or not ATM. Programs having atomics in the minor
loop are pathological in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52941
--- Comment #5 from Oleg Endo 2012-04-16 09:33:25
UTC ---
Created attachment 27165
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27165
WIP patch
The temporary string buffers should have been 'static' of course.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52941
--- Comment #4 from Oleg Endo 2012-04-16 09:14:57
UTC ---
Created attachment 27164
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27164
WIP patch
The attached patch adds support for movco.l/movli.l insns on SH4A for
-msoft-atomic. It also
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52941
--- Comment #3 from Kazumoto Kojima 2012-04-13
03:29:25 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> One more thing regarding movco/movli ... do you think it's OK to use them also
> to do atomics on types < SImode? As far as I can see it should be safe to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52941
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52941
--- Comment #1 from Kazumoto Kojima 2012-04-12
01:18:42 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
> Other than that, should we add another option '-mhard-atomic' (which would
> enable the movco/movli atomics on SH4A and disable all atomic insns for
> non-
20 matches
Mail list logo
