This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [PATCH] [s390x] Fix build of z9 iconv rountines on z900 with <binutils-2.23


On Friday 17 August 2012 11:53:21 Andreas Krebbel wrote:
> On 12/08/12 07:35, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > From: Andreas Krebbel <krebbel@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> > 
> > the attached patch fixes the problem mentioned by Aurelien in:
> > http://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2011-03/msg00000.html
> > http://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2011-03/msg00036.html
> > 
> > The UTF conversion modules detect at runtime whether the conversion
> > instructions can be used or not.  So 'as' should not reject them when
> > building for a lower CPU level.  On the other hand it should
> > nevertheless be possible to build the modules optimizing for a higher
> > CPU level without as rejecting new instructions.  One way is to
> > introduce -march=all in 'as' in order to basically disable the
> > instruction checks. I've committed a patch to binutils introducing
> > -march=all so that it can be used in the future:
> > 
> > http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2011-03/msg00355.html
> > 
> > But we cannot use that option right now since it would bind glibc
> > build to upstream binutils.  For now I don't see a way around
> > replacing the mnemonics with .insn .
> > 
> > Done with the attached patch.  I've verified that the same binary code
> > is generated for the modules.
> > 
> > 2011-03-18  Andreas Krebbel  <Andreas.Krebbel@de.ibm.com>
> > 
> > 	* sysdeps/s390/s390-64/utf16-utf32-z9.c: Replace UTF conversion
> > 	mnemonics with .insn.
> > 	* sysdeps/s390/s390-64/utf8-utf16-z9.c: Likewise.
> > 	* sysdeps/s390/s390-64/utf8-utf32-z9.c: Likewise.
> > 
> > ---
> > Seems like this was never merged.  Anyone mind if I do it?
> 
> This became obsolet with:
> http://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2011-04/msg00021.html
> 
> So no. Please don't merge :)

sounds good to me.  thanks!
-mike

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]