Re: [PATCH] x86: Reject target("no-general-regs-only")

2020-08-27 Thread H.J. Lu via Gcc-patches 
On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 1:47 AM Richard Biener
 wrote:
>
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 9:40 PM H.J. Lu via Gcc-patches
>  wrote:
> >
> > Reject target("no-general-regs-only") pragma and attribute.
>
> mgeneral-regs-only
> Target Report RejectNegative Mask(GENERAL_REGS_ONLY) Var(ix86_target_flags) 
> Save
> Generate code which uses only the general registers.
>
> it has already RejectNegative - why's that not honored?  Is this a general
> issue?
>

target("no-general-regs-only") needs to be handled separately.

-- 
H.J.

Re: [PATCH] x86: Reject target("no-general-regs-only")

2020-08-27 Thread Richard Biener via Gcc-patches 
On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 9:40 PM H.J. Lu via Gcc-patches
 wrote:
>
> Reject target("no-general-regs-only") pragma and attribute.

mgeneral-regs-only
Target Report RejectNegative Mask(GENERAL_REGS_ONLY) Var(ix86_target_flags) Save
Generate code which uses only the general registers.

it has already RejectNegative - why's that not honored?  Is this a general
issue?

Richard.

> gcc/
>
> PR target/96802
> * config/i386/i386-options.c (ix86_valid_target_attribute_inner_p):
> Reject target("no-general-regs-only").
>
> gcc/testsuite/
>
> PR target/96802
> * gcc.target/i386/pr96802-1.c: New test.
> * gcc.target/i386/pr96802-2.c: Likewise.
> ---
>  gcc/config/i386/i386-options.c|  7 +++
>  gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr96802-1.c | 12 
>  gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr96802-2.c | 16 
>  3 files changed, 35 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr96802-1.c
>  create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr96802-2.c
>
> diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/i386-options.c b/gcc/config/i386/i386-options.c
> index e0fc68c27bf..b93c338346f 100644
> --- a/gcc/config/i386/i386-options.c
> +++ b/gcc/config/i386/i386-options.c
> @@ -1189,6 +1189,13 @@ ix86_valid_target_attribute_inner_p (tree fndecl, tree 
> args, char *p_strings[],
> {
>   if (mask == OPTION_MASK_GENERAL_REGS_ONLY)
> {
> + if (!opt_set_p)
> +   {
> + error_at (loc, "pragma or attribute %  "
> +   "does not allow a negated form", p);
> + return false;
> +   }
> +
>   if (type != ix86_opt_ix86_yes)
> gcc_unreachable ();
>
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr96802-1.c 
> b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr96802-1.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 000..e6ceb95d238
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr96802-1.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
> +/* { dg-do compile } */
> +
> +/* Reject the negated form of non-negatable attributes.  */
> +
> +__attribute__ ((target ("no-general-regs-only")))
> +int
> +foo (int a)
> +{
> +  return a + 1;
> +}
> +
> +/* { dg-error "does not allow a negated form" "" { target *-*-* } 0 } */
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr96802-2.c 
> b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr96802-2.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 000..515f5673777
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr96802-2.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
> +/* { dg-do compile } */
> +
> +/* Reject the negated form of non-negatable pragma target.  */
> +
> +#pragma GCC push_options
> +#pragma GCC target("no-general-regs-only")
> +
> +int
> +foo (int a)
> +{
> +  return a + 1;
> +}
> +
> +#pragma GCC pop_options
> +
> +/* { dg-error "does not allow a negated form" "" { target *-*-* } 0 } */
> --
> 2.26.2
>

Re: [PATCH] x86: Reject target("no-general-regs-only")

2020-08-26 Thread Uros Bizjak via Gcc-patches 
> Reject target("no-general-regs-only") pragma and attribute.
>
> gcc/
>
> PR target/96802
> * config/i386/i386-options.c (ix86_valid_target_attribute_inner_p):
> Reject target("no-general-regs-only").
>
> gcc/testsuite/
>
> PR target/96802
> * gcc.target/i386/pr96802-1.c: New test.
> * gcc.target/i386/pr96802-2.c: Likewise.

OK.

Thanks,
Uros.

[PATCH] x86: Reject target("no-general-regs-only")

2020-08-26 Thread H.J. Lu via Gcc-patches 
Reject target("no-general-regs-only") pragma and attribute.

gcc/

PR target/96802
* config/i386/i386-options.c (ix86_valid_target_attribute_inner_p):
Reject target("no-general-regs-only").

gcc/testsuite/

PR target/96802
* gcc.target/i386/pr96802-1.c: New test.
* gcc.target/i386/pr96802-2.c: Likewise.
---
 gcc/config/i386/i386-options.c|  7 +++
 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr96802-1.c | 12 
 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr96802-2.c | 16 
 3 files changed, 35 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr96802-1.c
 create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr96802-2.c

diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/i386-options.c b/gcc/config/i386/i386-options.c
index e0fc68c27bf..b93c338346f 100644
--- a/gcc/config/i386/i386-options.c
+++ b/gcc/config/i386/i386-options.c
@@ -1189,6 +1189,13 @@ ix86_valid_target_attribute_inner_p (tree fndecl, tree 
args, char *p_strings[],
{
  if (mask == OPTION_MASK_GENERAL_REGS_ONLY)
{
+ if (!opt_set_p)
+   {
+ error_at (loc, "pragma or attribute %  "
+   "does not allow a negated form", p);
+ return false;
+   }
+
  if (type != ix86_opt_ix86_yes)
gcc_unreachable ();
 
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr96802-1.c 
b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr96802-1.c
new file mode 100644
index 000..e6ceb95d238
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr96802-1.c
@@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
+/* { dg-do compile } */
+
+/* Reject the negated form of non-negatable attributes.  */
+
+__attribute__ ((target ("no-general-regs-only")))
+int
+foo (int a)
+{
+  return a + 1;
+}
+
+/* { dg-error "does not allow a negated form" "" { target *-*-* } 0 } */
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr96802-2.c 
b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr96802-2.c
new file mode 100644
index 000..515f5673777
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr96802-2.c
@@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
+/* { dg-do compile } */
+
+/* Reject the negated form of non-negatable pragma target.  */
+
+#pragma GCC push_options
+#pragma GCC target("no-general-regs-only")
+
+int
+foo (int a)
+{
+  return a + 1;
+}
+
+#pragma GCC pop_options
+
+/* { dg-error "does not allow a negated form" "" { target *-*-* } 0 } */
-- 
2.26.2