Excerpts from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus via Gcc-patches's message of Januar 13, 2023 6:54 pm: > In the context of D the interpretation of S390, S390X, and SystemZ is a > bit fuzzy. The wording S390X was wrongly deprecated in favour of > SystemZ by commit > https://github.com/dlang/dlang.org/commit/3b50a4c3faf01c32234d0ef8be5f82915a61c23f > Thus, SystemZ is used for 64-bit targets, now, and S390 for 31-bit > targets. However, in TARGET_D_CPU_VERSIONS depending on TARGET_ZARCH we > set the CPU version to SystemZ. This is also the case if compiled for > 31-bit targets leading to the following error: > > libphobos/libdruntime/core/sys/posix/sys/stat.d:967:13: error: static assert: > '96u == 144u' is false > 967 | static assert(stat_t.sizeof == 144); > | ^ >
So that I follow, there are three possible combinations? ESA 31-bit (S390) ESA 64-bit (what was S390X) z/Arch 64-bit (SystemZ) > Thus in order to keep this patch simple I went for keeping SystemZ for > 64-bit targets and S390, as usual, for 31-bit targets and dropped the > distinction between ESA and z/Architecture. > > Bootstrapped and regtested on IBM zSystems. Ok for mainline? > OK by me. Maybe keep both S390X and SystemZ for TARGET_64BIT? There's only ever been a binary distinction as far as I'm aware. Iain.
