| Message ID | 20231004170455.76C1A2043D@pchp3.se.axis.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [v2,1/2] testsuite: Add dg-require-atomic-cmpxchg-word | expand |
Ping. > From: Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp@axis.com> > Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2023 19:04:55 +0200 > > > From: Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp@axis.com> > > Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2023 17:15:28 +0200 > > > New version coming up. > > Using pointer-sized int instead of int, > __atomic_compare_exchange instead of __atomic_exchange, > renamed to atomic-cmpxchg-word from atomic-exchange, and > updating a comment that already seemed reasonably well > placed. > > Tested as with v1 1/2. > > Ok to commit? > > -- >8 -- > Some targets (armv6-m) support inline atomic load and store, > i.e. dg-require-thread-fence matches, but not atomic operations like > compare and exchange. > > This directive can be used to replace uses of dg-require-thread-fence > where an atomic operation is actually used. > > * testsuite/lib/dg-options.exp (dg-require-atomic-cmpxchg-word): > New proc. > * testsuite/lib/libstdc++.exp (check_v3_target_atomic_cmpxchg_word): > Ditto. > --- > libstdc++-v3/testsuite/lib/dg-options.exp | 9 ++++++ > libstdc++-v3/testsuite/lib/libstdc++.exp | 37 +++++++++++++++++++++++ > 2 files changed, 46 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/lib/dg-options.exp b/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/lib/dg-options.exp > index 84ad0c65330b..850442b6b7c1 100644 > --- a/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/lib/dg-options.exp > +++ b/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/lib/dg-options.exp > @@ -133,6 +133,15 @@ proc dg-require-thread-fence { args } { > return > } > > +proc dg-require-atomic-cmpxchg-word { args } { > + if { ![ check_v3_target_atomic_cmpxchg_word ] } { > + upvar dg-do-what dg-do-what > + set dg-do-what [list [lindex ${dg-do-what} 0] "N" "P"] > + return > + } > + return > +} > + > proc dg-require-atomic-builtins { args } { > if { ![ check_v3_target_atomic_builtins ] } { > upvar dg-do-what dg-do-what > diff --git a/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/lib/libstdc++.exp b/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/lib/libstdc++.exp > index 608056e5068e..4bedb36dc6f9 100644 > --- a/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/lib/libstdc++.exp > +++ b/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/lib/libstdc++.exp > @@ -1221,6 +1221,43 @@ proc check_v3_target_thread_fence { } { > }] > } > > +proc check_v3_target_atomic_cmpxchg_word { } { > + return [check_v3_target_prop_cached et_atomic_cmpxchg_word { > + global cxxflags > + global DEFAULT_CXXFLAGS > + > + # Set up and link a C++11 test program that depends on > + # atomic-compare-exchange being available for a pointer-sized > + # integer. It should be sufficient as gcc can derive all > + # other operations when a target implements this operation. > + set src atomic_cmpxchg_word[pid].cc > + > + set f [open $src "w"] > + puts $f " > + __UINTPTR_TYPE__ i, j, k; > + int main() { > + __atomic_compare_exchange (&i, &j, &k, 1, __ATOMIC_SEQ_CST, __ATOMIC_SEQ_CST); > + return 0; > + }" > + close $f > + > + set cxxflags_saved $cxxflags > + set cxxflags "$cxxflags $DEFAULT_CXXFLAGS -Werror -std=gnu++11" > + > + set lines [v3_target_compile $src /dev/null executable ""] > + set cxxflags $cxxflags_saved > + file delete $src > + > + if [string match "" $lines] { > + # No error message, linking succeeded. > + return 1 > + } else { > + verbose "check_v3_target_atomic_cmpxchg_word: compilation failed" 2 > + return 0 > + } > + }] > +} > + > # Return 1 if atomics_bool and atomic_int are always lock-free, 0 otherwise. > proc check_v3_target_atomic_builtins { } { > return [check_v3_target_prop_cached et_atomic_builtins { > -- > 2.30.2 >
LGTM but I'm not a maintainer ;-) On Thu, 12 Oct 2023 at 04:21, Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp@axis.com> wrote: > > Ping. > > > From: Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp@axis.com> > > Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2023 19:04:55 +0200 > > > > > From: Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp@axis.com> > > > Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2023 17:15:28 +0200 > > > > > New version coming up. > > > > Using pointer-sized int instead of int, > > __atomic_compare_exchange instead of __atomic_exchange, > > renamed to atomic-cmpxchg-word from atomic-exchange, and > > updating a comment that already seemed reasonably well > > placed. > > > > Tested as with v1 1/2. > > > > Ok to commit? > > > > -- >8 -- > > Some targets (armv6-m) support inline atomic load and store, > > i.e. dg-require-thread-fence matches, but not atomic operations like > > compare and exchange. > > > > This directive can be used to replace uses of dg-require-thread-fence > > where an atomic operation is actually used. > > > > * testsuite/lib/dg-options.exp (dg-require-atomic-cmpxchg-word): > > New proc. > > * testsuite/lib/libstdc++.exp (check_v3_target_atomic_cmpxchg_word): > > Ditto. > > --- > > libstdc++-v3/testsuite/lib/dg-options.exp | 9 ++++++ > > libstdc++-v3/testsuite/lib/libstdc++.exp | 37 +++++++++++++++++++++++ > > 2 files changed, 46 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/lib/dg-options.exp b/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/lib/dg-options.exp > > index 84ad0c65330b..850442b6b7c1 100644 > > --- a/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/lib/dg-options.exp > > +++ b/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/lib/dg-options.exp > > @@ -133,6 +133,15 @@ proc dg-require-thread-fence { args } { > > return > > } > > > > +proc dg-require-atomic-cmpxchg-word { args } { > > + if { ![ check_v3_target_atomic_cmpxchg_word ] } { > > + upvar dg-do-what dg-do-what > > + set dg-do-what [list [lindex ${dg-do-what} 0] "N" "P"] > > + return > > + } > > + return > > +} > > + > > proc dg-require-atomic-builtins { args } { > > if { ![ check_v3_target_atomic_builtins ] } { > > upvar dg-do-what dg-do-what > > diff --git a/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/lib/libstdc++.exp b/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/lib/libstdc++.exp > > index 608056e5068e..4bedb36dc6f9 100644 > > --- a/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/lib/libstdc++.exp > > +++ b/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/lib/libstdc++.exp > > @@ -1221,6 +1221,43 @@ proc check_v3_target_thread_fence { } { > > }] > > } > > > > +proc check_v3_target_atomic_cmpxchg_word { } { > > + return [check_v3_target_prop_cached et_atomic_cmpxchg_word { > > + global cxxflags > > + global DEFAULT_CXXFLAGS > > + > > + # Set up and link a C++11 test program that depends on > > + # atomic-compare-exchange being available for a pointer-sized > > + # integer. It should be sufficient as gcc can derive all > > + # other operations when a target implements this operation. > > + set src atomic_cmpxchg_word[pid].cc > > + > > + set f [open $src "w"] > > + puts $f " > > + __UINTPTR_TYPE__ i, j, k; > > + int main() { > > + __atomic_compare_exchange (&i, &j, &k, 1, __ATOMIC_SEQ_CST, __ATOMIC_SEQ_CST); > > + return 0; > > + }" > > + close $f > > + > > + set cxxflags_saved $cxxflags > > + set cxxflags "$cxxflags $DEFAULT_CXXFLAGS -Werror -std=gnu++11" > > + > > + set lines [v3_target_compile $src /dev/null executable ""] > > + set cxxflags $cxxflags_saved > > + file delete $src > > + > > + if [string match "" $lines] { > > + # No error message, linking succeeded. > > + return 1 > > + } else { > > + verbose "check_v3_target_atomic_cmpxchg_word: compilation failed" 2 > > + return 0 > > + } > > + }] > > +} > > + > > # Return 1 if atomics_bool and atomic_int are always lock-free, 0 otherwise. > > proc check_v3_target_atomic_builtins { } { > > return [check_v3_target_prop_cached et_atomic_builtins { > > -- > > 2.30.2 > >
On 10/12/23 08:38, Christophe Lyon wrote:
> LGTM but I'm not a maintainer ;-)
LGTM to as well -- I usually try to stay out of libstdc++, but this
looks simple enough. Both patches in this series are OK.
jeff
On Thu, 12 Oct 2023, 17:11 Jeff Law, <jeffreyalaw@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On 10/12/23 08:38, Christophe Lyon wrote: > > LGTM but I'm not a maintainer ;-) > LGTM to as well -- I usually try to stay out of libstdc++, but this > looks simple enough. Both patches in this series are OK. > Thanks for stepping in, Jeff. The patches are indeed fine, I'm just offline due to circumstances beyond my control. I hope normal service will resume soon.
Hi, Is it okay to backport 62b29347c38394ae32858f2301aa9aa65205984e, 2a4d9e4f533c77870cc0eb60fbbd8047da4c7386 and ba0cde8ba2d93b7193050eb5ef3cc6f7a2cdfe61 to releases/gcc-13? Without this backport, I see these failures on arm-none-eabi: FAIL: 29_atomics/atomic/compare_exchange_padding.cc (test for excess errors) FAIL: 29_atomics/atomic_ref/compare_exchange_padding.cc (test for excess errors) Kind regards, Torbjörn On 2023-10-13 00:23, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > > > On Thu, 12 Oct 2023, 17:11 Jeff Law, <jeffreyalaw@gmail.com > <mailto:jeffreyalaw@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > > On 10/12/23 08:38, Christophe Lyon wrote: > > LGTM but I'm not a maintainer ;-) > LGTM to as well -- I usually try to stay out of libstdc++, but this > looks simple enough. Both patches in this series are OK. > > > Thanks for stepping in, Jeff. The patches are indeed fine, I'm just > offline due to circumstances beyond my control. I hope normal service > will resume soon. > >
On Wed, 7 Feb 2024 at 16:31, Torbjorn SVENSSON < torbjorn.svensson@foss.st.com> wrote: > Hi, > > Is it okay to backport 62b29347c38394ae32858f2301aa9aa65205984e, > 2a4d9e4f533c77870cc0eb60fbbd8047da4c7386 and > ba0cde8ba2d93b7193050eb5ef3cc6f7a2cdfe61 to releases/gcc-13? > > Without this backport, I see these failures on arm-none-eabi: > > FAIL: 29_atomics/atomic/compare_exchange_padding.cc (test for excess > errors) > FAIL: 29_atomics/atomic_ref/compare_exchange_padding.cc (test for excess > errors) > Yes, OK > > Kind regards, > Torbjörn > > On 2023-10-13 00:23, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, 12 Oct 2023, 17:11 Jeff Law, <jeffreyalaw@gmail.com > > <mailto:jeffreyalaw@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > > > > > > On 10/12/23 08:38, Christophe Lyon wrote: > > > LGTM but I'm not a maintainer ;-) > > LGTM to as well -- I usually try to stay out of libstdc++, but this > > looks simple enough. Both patches in this series are OK. > > > > > > Thanks for stepping in, Jeff. The patches are indeed fine, I'm just > > offline due to circumstances beyond my control. I hope normal service > > will resume soon. > > > > > >
On 2024-02-07 17:33, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > > > On Wed, 7 Feb 2024 at 16:31, Torbjorn SVENSSON > <torbjorn.svensson@foss.st.com <mailto:torbjorn.svensson@foss.st.com>> > wrote: > > Hi, > > Is it okay to backport 62b29347c38394ae32858f2301aa9aa65205984e, > 2a4d9e4f533c77870cc0eb60fbbd8047da4c7386 and > ba0cde8ba2d93b7193050eb5ef3cc6f7a2cdfe61 to releases/gcc-13? > > Without this backport, I see these failures on arm-none-eabi: > > FAIL: 29_atomics/atomic/compare_exchange_padding.cc (test for excess > errors) > FAIL: 29_atomics/atomic_ref/compare_exchange_padding.cc (test for > excess > errors) > > > Yes, OK Pushed as b937b1189069b24f8d1a5c25d8f062029784fb0c, fa0e0c28ee8f6ca2f8d5c50737647bef734dc898 and 18fd8d29b27ec9ace70098b4a451f5296276812e.
diff --git a/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/lib/dg-options.exp b/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/lib/dg-options.exp index 84ad0c65330b..850442b6b7c1 100644 --- a/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/lib/dg-options.exp +++ b/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/lib/dg-options.exp @@ -133,6 +133,15 @@ proc dg-require-thread-fence { args } { return } +proc dg-require-atomic-cmpxchg-word { args } { + if { ![ check_v3_target_atomic_cmpxchg_word ] } { + upvar dg-do-what dg-do-what + set dg-do-what [list [lindex ${dg-do-what} 0] "N" "P"] + return + } + return +} + proc dg-require-atomic-builtins { args } { if { ![ check_v3_target_atomic_builtins ] } { upvar dg-do-what dg-do-what diff --git a/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/lib/libstdc++.exp b/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/lib/libstdc++.exp index 608056e5068e..4bedb36dc6f9 100644 --- a/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/lib/libstdc++.exp +++ b/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/lib/libstdc++.exp @@ -1221,6 +1221,43 @@ proc check_v3_target_thread_fence { } { }] } +proc check_v3_target_atomic_cmpxchg_word { } { + return [check_v3_target_prop_cached et_atomic_cmpxchg_word { + global cxxflags + global DEFAULT_CXXFLAGS + + # Set up and link a C++11 test program that depends on + # atomic-compare-exchange being available for a pointer-sized + # integer. It should be sufficient as gcc can derive all + # other operations when a target implements this operation. + set src atomic_cmpxchg_word[pid].cc + + set f [open $src "w"] + puts $f " + __UINTPTR_TYPE__ i, j, k; + int main() { + __atomic_compare_exchange (&i, &j, &k, 1, __ATOMIC_SEQ_CST, __ATOMIC_SEQ_CST); + return 0; + }" + close $f + + set cxxflags_saved $cxxflags + set cxxflags "$cxxflags $DEFAULT_CXXFLAGS -Werror -std=gnu++11" + + set lines [v3_target_compile $src /dev/null executable ""] + set cxxflags $cxxflags_saved + file delete $src + + if [string match "" $lines] { + # No error message, linking succeeded. + return 1 + } else { + verbose "check_v3_target_atomic_cmpxchg_word: compilation failed" 2 + return 0 + } + }] +} + # Return 1 if atomics_bool and atomic_int are always lock-free, 0 otherwise. proc check_v3_target_atomic_builtins { } { return [check_v3_target_prop_cached et_atomic_builtins {