On 04/10/2018 06:27 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
> On 04/10/2018 11:19 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 02:31:04PM +0200, Martin Liška wrote:
>>> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
>>>
>>> 2018-03-28 Martin Liska <mli...@suse.cz>
>>>
>>> * gcc.dg/string-opt-1.c:
>> I guess you really didn't mean to keep the above entry around, just the one
>> below, right?
> Sure, fixed.
>
>>> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
>>>
>>> 2018-03-14 Martin Liska <mli...@suse.cz>
>>>
>>> * gcc.dg/string-opt-1.c: Adjust scans for i386 and glibc target
>>> and others.
>>> --- a/gcc/config.gcc
>>> +++ b/gcc/config.gcc
>>> @@ -1607,6 +1607,7 @@ x86_64-*-linux* | x86_64-*-kfreebsd*-gnu)
>>> x86_64-*-linux*)
>>> tm_file="${tm_file} linux.h linux-android.h i386/linux-common.h
>>> i386/linux64.h"
>>> extra_options="${extra_options} linux-android.opt"
>>> + extra_objs="${extra_objs} x86-linux.o"
>>> ;;
>> The should go into the i[34567]86-*-linux*) case too (outside of the
>> if test x$enable_targets = xall; then conditional).
>> Or maybe better, remove the above and do it in:
>> i[34567]86-*-linux* | x86_64-*-linux*)
>> extra_objs="${extra_objs} cet.o"
>> tmake_file="$tmake_file i386/t-linux i386/t-cet"
>> ;;
>> spot, just add x86-linux.o next to cet.o.
> Done.
>
>>> --- a/gcc/config/i386/linux.h
>>> +++ b/gcc/config/i386/linux.h
>>> @@ -24,3 +24,5 @@ along with GCC; see the file COPYING3. If not see
>>>
>>> #undef MUSL_DYNAMIC_LINKER
>>> #define MUSL_DYNAMIC_LINKER "/lib/ld-musl-i386.so.1"
>>> +
>>> +#define SUBTARGET_LIBC_FUNC_SPEED ix86_linux_libc_func_speed
>>> diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/linux64.h b/gcc/config/i386/linux64.h
>>> index f2d913e30ac..d855f5cc239 100644
>>> --- a/gcc/config/i386/linux64.h
>>> +++ b/gcc/config/i386/linux64.h
>>> @@ -37,3 +37,5 @@ see the files COPYING3 and COPYING.RUNTIME respectively.
>>> If not, see
>>> #define MUSL_DYNAMIC_LINKER64 "/lib/ld-musl-x86_64.so.1"
>>> #undef MUSL_DYNAMIC_LINKERX32
>>> #define MUSL_DYNAMIC_LINKERX32 "/lib/ld-musl-x32.so.1"
>>> +
>>> +#define SUBTARGET_LIBC_FUNC_SPEED ix86_linux_libc_func_speed
>> And the above two changes should be replaced by a change in
>> gcc/config/i386/linux-common.h.
> Likewise.
>
>>> +#include "coretypes.h"
>>> +#include "cp/cp-tree.h" /* This is why we're a separate module. */
>> Why do you need cp/cp-tree.h? That is just too weird.
>> The function just uses libc_speed (in core-types.h, built_in_function
>> (likewise), OPTION_GLIBC (config/linux.h).
> I ended up with minimal set of includes:
>
> #include "config.h"
> #include "system.h"
> #include "coretypes.h"
> #include "backend.h"
> #include "tree.h"
>
> I'm retesting the patch.
>
> Martin
>
>> Jakub
>>
>
> 0001-Introduce-new-libc_func_speed-target-hook-PR-middle-.patch
>
>
> From bed35715063f9435b697eaf4c9868f81e8556de8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: marxin <mli...@suse.cz>
> Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2018 09:44:18 +0100
> Subject: [PATCH] Introduce new libc_func_speed target hook (PR
> middle-end/81657).
>
> gcc/ChangeLog:
>
> 2018-03-14 Martin Liska <mli...@suse.cz>
>
> PR middle-end/81657
> * builtins.c (expand_builtin_memory_copy_args): Handle situation
> when libc library provides a fast mempcpy implementation/
> * config/linux-protos.h (ix86_linux_libc_func_speed): New.
> (TARGET_LIBC_FUNC_SPEED): Likewise.
> * config/i386/linux-common.h (SUBTARGET_LIBC_FUNC_SPEED): Define
> macro.
> * config/i386/t-linux: Add x86-linux.o.
> * config.gcc: Likewise.
> * config/i386/x86-linux.c: New file.
> * coretypes.h (enum libc_speed): Likewise.
> * doc/tm.texi: Document new target hook.
> * doc/tm.texi.in: Likewise.
> * expr.c (emit_block_move_hints): Handle libc bail out argument.
> * expr.h (emit_block_move_hints): Add new parameters.
> * target.def: Add new hook.
> * targhooks.c (enum libc_speed): New enum.
> (default_libc_func_speed): Provide a default hook
> implementation.
> * targhooks.h (default_libc_func_speed): Likewise.
>
> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
>
> 2018-03-14 Martin Liska <mli...@suse.cz>
>
> * gcc.dg/string-opt-1.c: Adjust scans for i386 and glibc target
> and others.
This looks pretty reasonable now. Let's go with it. If we need to
adjust other targets we certainly can fault them in as their properties
are discovered/updated.
jeff
