[Bug target/68945] enable libcilkrts on SPARC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68945 --- Comment #7 from Stefan Teleman --- > Since Stefan hasn't followed up and I'm currently looking at other > libcilkrts issues anyway, I'm taking over from here. Had every intention to follow-up with a cleaned-up patch, but did not find the time to re-do the patch. I will look into the SIGBUS crashes on SPARC64 and see what i come up with.
[Bug target/68945] New: RFE: enable libcilkrts on SPARC [ patch included ]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68945 Bug ID: 68945 Summary: RFE: enable libcilkrts on SPARC [ patch included ] Product: gcc Version: 4.9.3 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: target Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: stefan.teleman at oracle dot com Target Milestone: --- Hi. I would like to submit a patch for enabling libcilkrts on SPARC. The patch is based on GCC 4.9.3. With this patch, the libcilkrts test harness passes 100% on SPARC.
[Bug target/68945] RFE: enable libcilkrts on SPARC [ patch included ]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68945 Stefan Teleman changed: What|Removed |Added CC||stefan.teleman at oracle dot com --- Comment #1 from Stefan Teleman --- Created attachment 37050 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37050=edit enable libcilkrts on SPARC
[Bug target/68945] enable libcilkrts on SPARC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68945 --- Comment #3 from Stefan Teleman --- (In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #2) > Patches need to be posted on the gcc-patches@ mailing-list. > > A few remarks: > > - SPARC is not a platform/target, only an architecture, so I presume that > you mean SPARC/Solaris here? Actually, I also mean to include Linux and the BSD's that still build on and publish for SPARC. I know that FreeBSD and Gentoo Linux still build and publish SPARC distros. > > - you don't need 2 entries in configure.tgt > > - you don't need 2 entries in the target field of testcases. > > - you cannot patch Makefile.in directly, go through configure.ac instead. > > - I don't think that patching runtime/config/generic/os-unix-sysdep.c is > the way to go, you probably need to create runtime/config/sparc instead. > > - Why do you test all the possible flavours of macros? > > #if defined(sun) || defined(__sun) || defined(__sun__) > > #ifdef __sun__ is the correct version. OK, thank you for your comments. I will correct these and resubmit to the gcc-patches@ mailing list.
[Bug target/58833] RFE: 64-bit native compiler on Solaris
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58833 --- Comment #2 from Stefan Teleman stefan.teleman at oracle dot com --- Hi Eric, Thank you very much for answering so quickly! --Stefan
[Bug target/58833] New: RFE: 64-bit native compiler on Solaris
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58833 Bug ID: 58833 Summary: RFE: 64-bit native compiler on Solaris Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: target Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: stefan.teleman at oracle dot com This is much more of a RFE than a bug (defect). Would it be possible for GCC in Solaris to auto-configure itself as a 64-bit native compiler by default (instead of the current 32-bit native compiler default)? The output of `uname -p` in Solaris is always 'i386' or 'sparc', regardless of whether or not the kernel is 32-bit or 64-bit. In Solaris 11 and later, kernels are 64-bit only, so the output of `uname -p` does not really reflect reality. One way of working around this `uname -p` limitation in Solaris is to use the first string token in the output of `isainfo`, which is: 'amd64 i386' (on Intel) 'sparcv9 sparc' (on SPARC) I realize that 'isainfo' is not a Standard UNIX command, and that the suggestion of using 'isainfo' instead of `uname -p` is very Solaris-specific (and likely non-portable). Again, this is just a RFE. Thank you very much! --Stefan
