Noah Misch writes:
> I tested a gcc 64-bit build. Consistent with your followup, "b .+12" doesn't
> build, but "b $+12" builds and passes "make check". I am attaching the exact
> diff I tested.
> On GNU/Linux ppc, I get the same opcodes before and after the change.
Thanks for checking! I have
On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 09:58:46AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Noah Misch writes:
> > On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 10:36:46AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> So s_lock.h's PowerPC assembly code works if you have gcc configured to
> >> use gas as backend, but not if it's configured to use the native AIX
> >> a
I wrote:
> ... that assembler likes "$" for current location. I did a quick check on my
> oldest OS X PPC box, and it seems to be happy with "$" as well, so maybe
> we can use that --- though I see nothing about "$" in the GNU Assembler
> manual, which makes me a bit worried about whether it works
I wrote:
> Noah Misch writes:
>> On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 10:36:46AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> 2. Don't rely on local symbols in the PPC spinlock assembly code.
>> A third option is to use __sync intrinsics, like we do on ARM. I like (2).
> I've been waiting to hear confirmation from Steve that
Noah Misch writes:
> On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 10:36:46AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> the problem is that
>> IBM's assembler doesn't understand the "local symbol" notation supported
>> by the GNU assembler ("bne 1f" referencing the next occurrence of "1:").
>> So s_lock.h's PowerPC assembly code works
On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 10:36:46AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> the problem is that
> IBM's assembler doesn't understand the "local symbol" notation supported
> by the GNU assembler ("bne 1f" referencing the next occurrence of "1:").
> So s_lock.h's PowerPC assembly code works if you have gcc configure
A year ago we had a thread about assembler syntax errors on AIX, but it
died off when the original complainant stopped responding. I was recently
contacted off-list by Steve Underwood, who was seeing the same symptoms
on AIX 7.1. After some investigation, we found that the problem is that
IBM's a
