On 2/27/2026 4:42 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
On Sat, Feb 28, 2026 at 7:32 AM Jeffrey Law
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/25/2026 5:52 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
On Thu, Feb 26, 2026 at 8:39 AM H.J. Lu <[email protected]> wrote:
TARGET_PROMOTE_PROTOTYPES is an optimization, not an ABI requirement.
TARGET_PROMOTE_FUNCTION_MODE should be used for ABI requirement. Like
xtensa, mcore ABI requires sign extension of signed 8/16-bit integer
arguments to 32 bits and zero extension of unsigned integer 8/16-bit
arguments to 32 bits:
1. Rename xtensa_promote_function_mode to
default_promote_function_mode_sign_extend to sign-extend signed 8/16-bit
integer arguments to 32 bits and zero-extend of unsigned 8/16-bit
integer arguments to 32 bits.
2. Replace xtensa_promote_function_mode with
default_promote_function_mode_sign_extend.
3. Remove TARGET_PROMOTE_PROTOTYPES for mcore and define
TARGET_PROMOTE_FUNCTION_MODE with
default_promote_function_mode_sign_extend to properly extend 8/16-bit
arguments to 32 bits.
Targets with the same ABI requirement should define
TARGET_PROMOTE_FUNCTION_MODE with
default_promote_function_mode_sign_extend.
gcc/
PR target/119979
PR target/120888
* targhooks.cc (default_promote_function_mode_sign_extend): New.
* targhooks.h (default_promote_function_mode_sign_extend):
Likewise.
* config/mcore/mcore.cc (TARGET_PROMOTE_FUNCTION_MODE): Use
default_promote_function_mode_sign_extend.
(TARGET_PROMOTE_PROTOTYPES): Removed.
* config/xtensa/xtensa.cc (xtensa_promote_function_mode): Removed.
(TARGET_PROMOTE_FUNCTION_MODE): Use
default_promote_function_mode_sign_extend.
gcc/testsuite/
PR target/119979
PR target/120888
* gcc.target/xtensa/pr120888-1.c: Removed to ...
* gcc.dg/zero-extend.c: This. Enable for mcore and xtensa.
* gcc.target/xtensa/pr120888-2.c: Removed to ...
* gcc.dg/sign-extend.c: This. Enable for mcore and xtensa.
--
H.J.
Add the missing patch.
Note you broke mcore-elf in new and interesting ways.
Tests that now fail, but worked before (2 tests):
mcore-sim: gcc: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr84436-5.c execution test
mcore-sim: gcc: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr84436-5.c execution test
How does it fail?
Dunno other than it was clearly your patch. If I had more information,
I'd pass it along.
And you broke iq2000-elf: Tests that now fail, but worked before (99 tests):
iq2000-sim: gcc: c-c++-common/pr111309-1.c -Wc++-compat execution test
[ ... ]
This patch doesn't change iq2000.
Well, it worked before your change and not afterwards, so even though
it's not directly changing iq2000, it did change something indirectly it
seems.
Jeff
