From patchwork Fri Apr 1 16:32:19 2022
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Patchwork-Submitter: Xi Ruoyao
X-Patchwork-Id: 1612310
Return-Path:
X-Original-To: incoming@patchwork.ozlabs.org
Delivered-To: patchwork-incoming@bilbo.ozlabs.org
Authentication-Results: bilbo.ozlabs.org;
dkim=pass (1024-bit key;
unprotected) header.d=gcc.gnu.org header.i=@gcc.gnu.org header.a=rsa-sha256
header.s=default header.b=n/L9dkDf;
dkim-atps=neutral
Authentication-Results: ozlabs.org;
spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=gcc.gnu.org
(client-ip=2620:52:3:1:0:246e:9693:128c; helo=sourceware.org;
envelope-from=gcc-patches-bounces+incoming=patchwork.ozlabs.org@gcc.gnu.org;
receiver=)
Received: from sourceware.org (server2.sourceware.org
[IPv6:2620:52:3:1:0:246e:9693:128c])
(using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest
SHA256)
(No client certificate requested)
by bilbo.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4KVQj75Y2Cz9sXM
for ; Sat, 2 Apr 2022 03:33:46 +1100 (AEDT)
Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1])
by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A74B73838009
for ; Fri, 1 Apr 2022 16:33:37 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org A74B73838009
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
s=default; t=1648830817;
bh=hcIr+aWjGdOri8tRxvTKX1bVvuVc3THsY4nuanpZ2Xw=;
h=Subject:To:Date:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:
List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To:Cc:From;
b=n/L9dkDfgvewvIuMMA81hTvHE2RMnlI593XFckpZUxCf0LBW6MZdfxzL3u1jmzoze
8JW5AGXW38GQWXEfjjGPGogfih9foR52hrEK4vxCo9ArFtzC0EOt/2E7H4vyvl8GuS
sxKmEEUj3ByQkvqfzrGCU+kDfTNmisC8ae+hDWRg=
X-Original-To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Received: from mengyan1223.wang (mengyan1223.wang [89.208.246.23])
by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D4D2A3858D28;
Fri, 1 Apr 2022 16:32:37 +0000 (GMT)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org D4D2A3858D28
Received: from [IPv6:240e:358:11c6:7500:dc73:854d:832e:3] (unknown
[IPv6:240e:358:11c6:7500:dc73:854d:832e:3])
(using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature ECDSA (P-384) server-digest
SHA384) (Client did not present a certificate)
(Authenticated sender: xry111@mengyan1223.wang)
by mengyan1223.wang (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A5AB666272;
Fri, 1 Apr 2022 12:32:31 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID:
Subject: [wwwdocs PATCH] document zero-width field ABI changes on MIPS
To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2022 00:32:19 +0800
User-Agent: Evolution 3.44.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3039.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, GIT_PATCH_0, JMQ_SPF_NEUTRAL,
SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_PASS, TXREP,
T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on
server2.sourceware.org
X-BeenThere: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gcc-patches mailing list
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Archive:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
X-Patchwork-Original-From: Xi Ruoyao via Gcc-patches
From: Xi Ruoyao
Reply-To: Xi Ruoyao
Cc: Richard Sandiford ,
Jakub Jelinek , YunQiang Su
Errors-To: gcc-patches-bounces+incoming=patchwork.ozlabs.org@gcc.gnu.org
Sender: "Gcc-patches"
Document PR102024 change (r12-7961 and 7962) for MIPS. Ok for wwwdocs?
---
htdocs/gcc-12/changes.html | 17 ++++++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/htdocs/gcc-12/changes.html b/htdocs/gcc-12/changes.html
index 4e1f6b0f..a2d8156f 100644
--- a/htdocs/gcc-12/changes.html
+++ b/htdocs/gcc-12/changes.html
@@ -50,6 +50,10 @@ a work-in-progress.
(so there is a C++ ABI incompatibility, GCC 4.4 and earlier compatible
with GCC 12 or later, incompatible with GCC 4.5 through GCC 11).
RISC-V has changed the handling of these already starting with GCC 10.
+ As the ABI requires, MIPS takes them into account handling function
+ return values so there is a C++ ABI incompatibility with GCC 4.5
+ through 11. For function arguments on MIPS, refer to
+ the MIPS specific entry.
GCC 12 on the above targets will report such incompatibilities as
warnings or other diagnostics unless -Wno-psabi
is used.
@@ -549,7 +553,18 @@ a work-in-progress.
-
+MIPS
+
+ - The ABI passing arguments
+ containing zero-width fields (for example, C/C++ zero-width
+ bit-fields, GNU C/C++ zero-length arrays, and GNU C empty structs)
+ has changed. Now a zero-width field will not prevent an aligned
+ 64-bit floating-point field next to it from being passed through
+ FPR. This is compatible with LLVM, but incompatible with previous
+ GCC releases. GCC 12 on MIPS will report such incompatibilities as
+ an inform unless
-Wno-psabi
is used.
+
+