On Sun, Jun 04, 2017 at 08:12:49PM -0600, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
> On 05/29/2017 04:29 AM, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote:
>
> >>diff --git a/gcc/doc/invoke.texi b/gcc/doc/invoke.texi
> >>index 65308c9d933..6cbb77a8dc4 100644
> >>--- a/gcc/doc/invoke.texi
> >>+++ b/gcc/doc/invoke.texi
> >>@@ -11382,6 +1138
Changes since v8:
* Documentation changes as requested by Sandra
* 3 functional test cases added
Torsten
gcc/c-family/ChangeLog
2017-06-13 Torsten Duwe
* c-attribs.c (c_common_attribute_table): Add entry for
"patchable_function_entry".
gcc/lto/ChangeL
Richard, Ping?
On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 07:00:27PM +0200, Torsten Duwe wrote:
> Changes since v8:
>
> * Documentation changes as requested by Sandra
> * 3 functional test cases added
>
> Torsten
>
>
> gcc/c-family/ChangeLog
> 2017-06-13 Torsten D
On Tue, Jul 04, 2017 at 12:02:47PM +0100, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
> On 13/06/17 18:00, Torsten Duwe wrote:
> > Changes since v8:
> >
> > * Documentation changes as requested by Sandra
> > * 3 functional test cases added
> >
> > Torst
On Tue, Jul 04, 2017 at 02:27:00PM +0100, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
> >
> > How about omitting the recording step and document that? This way the
> > instrumentation can still be useful on e.g. a.out format; the framework
> > would then have to check around each function entry whether the NO
Torsten Duwe
* c-attribs.c (c_common_attribute_table): Add entry for
"patchable_function_entry".
gcc/lto/ChangeLog
2017-07-04 Torsten Duwe
* lto-lang.c (lto_attribute_table): Add entry for
"patchable_function_entry".
gcc/ChangeLog
2017
Permit A 38
gcc/c-family/ChangeLog
2017-07-06 Torsten Duwe
* c-attribs.c (c_common_attribute_table): Add entry for
"patchable_function_entry".
gcc/lto/ChangeLog
2017-07-06 Torsten Duwe
* lto-lang.c (lto_attribute_table): Add
Change since v11:
< +#if TARGET_HAVE_NAMED_SECTIONS
> + if (record_p && targetm_common.have_named_sections)
(plus > +#include "common/common-target.h" )
Torsten
gcc/c-family/ChangeLog
2017-07-07 Torsten Duwe
* c-attribs.c (c_common_attr
What is the next step now? Is anybody going to commit that patch?
Torsten
On Fri, Jul 07, 2017 at 02:57:55PM +0100, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
> On 06/07/17 15:03, Torsten Duwe wrote:
> +#if TARGET_HAVE_NAMED_SECTIONS
No, this is a hook. You need t
On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 01:58:06PM +0300, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote:
> > On Jul 17, 2017, at 3:10 PM, Torsten Duwe wrote:
> >
> > What is the next step now? Is anybody going to commit that patch?
>
> Torsten, if you prefer I can commit your patch (after bootstrap and a reg
On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 10:12:00AM +0300, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote:
>
> I confirmed that bootstrap and reg test on x86_64-linux-gnu and
> aarch64-linux-gnu are OK.
Thanks a lot!
> Torsten, any update on which way you are going to handle copyright assignment
> -- apply for a new one or have one of
On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 10:12:00AM +0300, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote:
> >
> > SuSe/Novell choose to do its assignments per engineer, not for the whole
> > company, so I don't think you are covered as is.
>
> Torsten, any update on which way you are going to handle copyright assignment
> -- apply for
On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 04:16:25PM +0200, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> On Jul 07 2017, Torsten Duwe wrote:
>
> > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/patchable_function_entry-decl.c
> > b/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/patchable_function_entry-decl.c
> > new file mode 1006
ement with alternate
binary code.
But I'd rather leave this to the platform experts, or whoever comes up with
a good use case, to implement the proper cpu override hook. Meanwhile, as
long as the expected results remain undefined, disable the tests.
Torsten
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
2017
code sizes and offsets
around the prologue? (All target CPUs have an insn called "nop" which
does what we expect, AFAICS ;-) gcc should error out somehow meaningfully,
IMHO.
Torsten
2016-12-21 Torsten Duwe :
* c-family/c-attribs.c : introduce prolog_pad attribu
Changes since v4: hopefully addressed all of Sandra's requests
and suggestions concerning the documentation snippets, thanks
for the feedback. If it still isn't clear, feel free to rephrase
-- I'm a programmer, not a technical writer.
2017-01-13 Torsten Duwe :
And what's next now?
Maxim mentioned in this thread you should sort of formally approve(?)
a global feature, have you had a look at it yet?
I should emphasize that this code can substitute the -fentry for arm64 for
the purpose of kernel live patching that was discussed in the beginning,
as well a
s about now? Here is version 8, which is functionally identical
to v6 (v7 tried to guard the gen_nop call, which you wrote isn't neccessary).
The longer names required some reformatting.
Torsten
gcc/c-family/ChangeLog
2017-05-03 Torsten Duwe
* c-attrib
On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 05:25:45PM +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> There's still a a few details that need addressing, and some questions I
> have. Also Ccing Jakub to have another pair of eyes on the name of the
> section - I don't know if we want some sort of .gnu.something name.
So Jakub, Richard
ument ()
* Documentation has less "pad"s
* completely reworked default_print_prolog_pad ()
-- never liked the old version either.
Torsten
gcc/c-family/ChangeLog
2017-02-17 Torsten Duwe
* c-attribs.c (c_common_attribute_table): Add entry for "prolog_pad"
On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 11:01:16AM +, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
> On 13/01/17 12:19, Torsten Duwe wrote:
>
> > +++ b/gcc/doc/invoke.texi
> > @@ -11341,6 +11341,27 @@ of the function name, it is considered to be a
> > match. For C99 and C++
> > extended
On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 12:48:56PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> First of all, GCC is in stage4 and this isn't a fix for a regression, so it
> is not acceptable at this point. Next stage1 will start in April or so.
I had gotten the impression there were sort of branches in the SCM; this
of cou
On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 11:30:29PM -0700, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
> >
> >+@item prolog_pad
> >+@cindex @code{prolog_pad} function attribute
>
> I'm only a documentation maintainer so this is out of my area of
> responsibility, but I really wish we could rename the attribute and
> command-line opti
On Wed, Mar 01, 2017 at 11:34:37AM +, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
> On 01/03/17 11:26, Torsten Duwe wrote:
> >
> > However, writing some more documentation and being asked for clarity,
> > I found it more depicting to talk about the function entry point than
> &g
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 02:12:09PM +0200, Michael Matz wrote:
>
> . It can also be solved by having just one NOP after the function label,
> and a number of them before, then no thread can be in the nop pad. That
> seems to indicate that GCC should not try to be too clever and simply
> leave
ord a prolog_nop_pad_size value specified on the command line
in each function's attributes, so that it survives an LTO pipe.
Signed-off-by: Torsten Duwe
diff --git a/gcc/attribs.c b/gcc/attribs.c
index 16996e9..a5cf2aa 100644
--- a/gcc/attribs.c
+++ b/gcc/attribs.c
@@ -365,6 +365,21 @@ decl_attributes (
On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 12:01:47PM +0200, Jose E. Marchesi wrote:
>
> How is this supposed to be exploited atomically in RISC arches such as
> sparc? In such architectures you usually need to patch several
> instructions to load an absolute address into a register.
http://mpe.github.io/posts/201
imisation here is potentially wrong.
> >>
> >> * record a prolog_nop_pad_size value specified on the command line
> >> in each function's attributes, so that it survives an LTO pipe.
> >>
Signed-off-by: Torsten Duwe
diff --git a/gcc/attribs.c b/gc
Hi Maxim,
thanks for starting the work on this; I have added the missing
command line option. It builds now and the resulting compiler generates
a linux kernel with the desired properties, so work can continue there.
Torsten
diff --git a/gcc/c-family/c-common.c b/gcc/c-family/c-common.c
On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 11:39:48AM +0300, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote:
> > On Apr 27, 2016, at 6:22 PM, Torsten Duwe wrote:
>
> Your current patch is great for experiments for the kernel engineers to check
> if suggested approaches to code patching will work. Still, I prefer to
On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 11:58:25AM +0100, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
> On 28/04/16 09:47, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote:
> >> On Apr 27, 2016, at 7:26 PM, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
> >>
> >> with -mfentry, by default the user only has to
> >> implement the fentry call (linux wants nops there, but
> >> e.g. glibc coul
Signed-off-by: Torsten Duwe
---
gcc/ChangeLog:
2022-04-26 Torsten Duwe
* config/avr/avr-mcus.def (AVR_MCU): add definitions for
attiny{4,8,16,32}2{4,6,7}; 4k and 8k flash types use RCALL.
--- a/gcc/config/avr/avr-mcus.def
+++ b/gcc/config/avr/avr-mcus.def
@@ -333,6
32 matches
Mail list logo
