On 09/20/16 16:20, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: > > On 20/09/16 15:11, Bernd Edlinger wrote: >> On 09/20/16 13:29, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: >>> arm bootstrap is now failing: >>> $SRC/gcc/config/arm/arm.h:2229:40: error: ?: using integer constants in >>> boolean context [-Werror=int-in-bool-context] >>> : (TARGET_VFP_DOUBLE ? (TARGET_FP16 ? 14 : 12) : 0)) \ >>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~^~~~~~~~~~ >>> $SRC/gcc/config/arm/arm-c.c:133:7: note: in expansion of macro >>> 'TARGET_ARM_FP' >>> if (TARGET_ARM_FP) >>> >>> >>> The full definition of TARGET_ARM_FP is: >>> #define TARGET_ARM_FP \ >>> (!TARGET_SOFT_FLOAT ? (TARGET_VFP_SINGLE ? 4 \ >>> : (TARGET_VFP_DOUBLE ? (TARGET_FP16 ? 14 : 12) : 0)) \ >>> : 0) >>> >>> We want it set to 0 when there's no FP but when FP is available we set >>> it to a bitmask >>> to suggest the level that is available. That seems like a legitimate use >>> to me. >>> >> Ok, I see, sorry for that. >> >> I think I will have to suppress the warning if the conditional is in >> a macro somehow. >> >> Can you work around that for a few days? > > I changed to: > if (TARGET_ARM_FP != 0) > in my tree to allow the build to proceed but encountered another > bootstrap failure: > In file included from ./tm.h:38:0, > from $SRC/gcc/backend.h:28, > from $SRC/gcc/regrename.c:23: > $SRC/gcc/regrename.c: In function 'void rename_chains()': > $SRC/gcc/config/arm/arm.h:915:4: error: ?: using integer constants in > boolean context [-Werror=int-in-bool-context] > (TARGET_ARM \ > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > ? ARM_HARD_FRAME_POINTER_REGNUM \ > ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > : THUMB_HARD_FRAME_POINTER_REGNUM) > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > $SRC/gcc/regrename.c:484:8: note: in expansion of macro > 'HARD_FRAME_POINTER_REGNUM' > || (HARD_FRAME_POINTER_REGNUM && frame_pointer_needed > ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > That looks like a legitimate bug in regrename.c ? > The full condition is: > if (fixed_regs[reg] || global_regs[reg] > || (!HARD_FRAME_POINTER_IS_FRAME_POINTER && > frame_pointer_needed > && reg == HARD_FRAME_POINTER_REGNUM) > || (HARD_FRAME_POINTER_REGNUM && frame_pointer_needed > && reg == FRAME_POINTER_REGNUM)) > > The condition in the second || looks bogus (what use testing if a > register is 'non-zero'). > > So this looks like a useful catch by the warning, though I'm not sure at > first glance how > to fix it. > Kyrill >
I assume HARD_FRAME_POINTER_REGNUM is never zero. That looks like it should be || (frame_pointer_needed && reg == FRAME_POINTER_REGNUM) Bernd.
