Re: Remove last traces of HPPA support - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Heikki Linnakangas
Subject Re: Remove last traces of HPPA support
Date
Msg-id 7d7294a6-f07b-46ad-bb63-a68cd8cd899c@iki.fi
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Remove last traces of HPPA support  (Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Remove last traces of HPPA support
List pgsql-hackers
On 30/07/2024 00:50, Thomas Munro wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 3, 2024 at 8:09 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com> writes:
>>> Here are some experimental patches to try out some ideas mentioned
>>> upthread, that are approximately unlocked by that cleanup.
>>
>> FWIW, I'm good with getting rid of --disable-spinlocks and
>> --disable-atomics.  That's a fair amount of code and needing to
>> support it causes problems, as you say.  I am very much less
>> excited about ripping out our spinlock and/or atomics code in favor
>> of <stdatomic.h>; I just don't see the gain there, and I do see risk
>> in ceding control of the semantics and performance of those
>> primitives.
> 
> OK, <stdatomic.h> part on ice for now.  Here's an update of the rest,
> this time also removing the barrier fallbacks as discussed in the LTO
> thread[1].

Looks good to me.

> I guess we should also consider reimplementing the spinlock on the
> atomic API, but I can see that Andres is poking at spinlock code right
> now so I'll keep out of his way...
> 
> Side issue: I noticed via CI failure when I tried to require
> read/write barriers to be provided (a choice I backed out of), that on
> MSVC we seem to be using the full memory barrier fallback for those.
> Huh?  For x86, I think they should be using pg_compiler_barrier() (no
> code gen, just prevent reordering), not pg_pg_memory_barrier(), no?

Agreed, arch-x86.h is quite clear on that.

> Perhaps I'm missing something but I suspect we might be failing to
> include arch-x86.h on that compiler when we should... maybe it needs
> to detect _M_AMD64 too? 

Aha, yes I think that's it. Apparently, __x86_64__ is not defined on 
MSVC. To prove that, I added garbage to the "#ifdef __x86_64__" guarded 
block in atomics.h. The compilation passes on MSVC, but not on other 
platforms: https://cirrus-ci.com/build/6310061188841472.

That means that we're not getting the x86-64 instructions in 
src/port/pg_crc32c_sse42.c on MSVC either.

I think we should do:

#ifdef _M_AMD64
#define __x86_64__
#endif

somewhere, perhaps in src/include/port/win32.h.

-- 
Heikki Linnakangas
Neon (https://neon.tech)




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Sami Imseih
Date:
Subject: Re: Restart pg_usleep when interrupted
Next
From: Erik Wienhold
Date:
Subject: Re: psql: Add leakproof field to \dAo+ meta-command results