On Wed, 20 Apr 2016, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: > > On 15/04/16 17:27, James Greenhalgh wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 03:12:58PM +0100, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: > > > On 15/04/16 15:10, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > This is a repost of Andrew's fix for PR target/64971 that was originally > > > > posted at: > > > > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-02/msg00502.html > > > > > > > > The only change is that I substituted DImode for Pmode and added a FIXME > > > > comment to remind us to revisit this (see the PR in bugzilla for more > > > > info). > > > > > > > > Bootstrapped and tested on aarch64-none-linux-gnu (LP64, I don't have > > > > access > > > > to a full ILP32 system) This patch affects only ILP32 codegen so I've > > > > run a > > > > make check on aarch64-none-elf with /-mabi=ilp32 and nothing regressed. > > > > I think at this stage it's the least risky band-aid. > > > > > > > > Is this ok for trunk at this stage? > > I hope that we are able to revisit this for GCC 7 with the more complete > > fixes detailed in the bug report. > > > > I've got no objections to the patch as a band-aid step forward for the > > ILP32 ABI, and the patch is no risk to the LP64 ABI (the code added is very > > clearly predicated on TARGET_ILP32). > > > > As Jeff points out, this will need RM approval to go in to GCC 6. > > Sorry for the early ping, but since we're planning for RC2 this week > can I apply this to the GCC 6 branch?
Sure. A broken ILP32 aarch64 won't block the release. Thanks, Richard. > Thanks, > Kyrill > > > Thanks, > > James > > > > -- Richard Biener <rguent...@suse.de> SUSE LINUX GmbH, GF: Felix Imendoerffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG Nuernberg)
