Re: [PATCH] Make wine build with the Intel CC

[Jonathan Schleifer]

Maarten Lankhorst  wrote:
> Wine could build fine without c++, not sure why everything has to
> link against the c++ library as it will probably only be needed in
> winegcc. Also these compiling flags seem kind of agressive.

As I said, just quoted from my .profile, nothing special for wine. I
just have -lstdc++ added there as some apps need it to compile with icc.
> They are defined in include/winbase.h

That's the point. They are defined INCLUDING the asm code. That's why
the asm code is already defined and not needed in the file itself.
> just make sure icc is recognised there.

You mean: Make sure that icc doesn't get recognized as gcc. Well,
I tried that. It doesn't work. This will still end in stuff like:
/tmp/iccCwib4Das_.s:1499: Error: symbol `wine_get_fs' is already defined
/tmp/iccCwib4Das_.s:1523: Error: symbol `wine_set_fs' is already defined
> you can't just comment out those Interlocked functions, some
> applications might need them.

I only commented them out because they are defined TWICE. They are still
there and thus the programs run. I tested running a few apps with this
patch.
> Plus the way you do it makes the code unreadable. I cannot test this
> as I don't have icc.

I'm sure someone on the list has icc.

[PATCH] Make wine build with the Intel CC

[Steven Edwards]

On 4/21/07, Jonathan Schleifer  wrote:
> I'm sure someone on the list has icc.

I had it installed before but its been a while. I never could get
anything other than console apps to work, which I assumed could be do
to a calling convention mismatch like Eric spoke about. I'd be
interested in seeing bench marks of Wine compiled with gcc vs icc for
tasks like Office Bench.

Thanks

[PATCH] Make wine build with the Intel CC

[Jonathan Schleifer]

"Steven Edwards"  wrote:
> I had it installed before but its been a while. I never could get
> anything other than console apps to work, which I assumed could be do
> to a calling convention mismatch like Eric spoke about. I'd be
> interested in seeing bench marks of Wine compiled with gcc vs icc for
> tasks like Office Bench.

I don't know which version you had, but it must be really old. GUI
applications run with ICC. Gtk+ and QT. And of course ICC uses the C
calling convention!

[PATCH] Make wine build with the Intel CC

[Eric Pouech]

Jonathan Schleifer a écrit :
> "Steven Edwards"  wrote:
> > I had it installed before but its been a while. I never could get
> > anything other than console apps to work, which I assumed could be do
> > to a calling convention mismatch like Eric spoke about. I'd be
> > interested in seeing bench marks of Wine compiled with gcc vs icc for
> > tasks like Office Bench.
>
> I don't know which version you had, but it must be really old. GUI
> applications run with ICC. Gtk+ and QT. And of course ICC uses the C
> calling convention!

the point isn't about using the C calling convention but the stdcall 
calling convention
this seems to be fixed now
icc still produces a warning for function pointers declared in 
structures with stdcall calling convention, but emits the correct assembly
it seems now the major hurdle is that icc doesn't support the inline 
conventions of GCC (and is likely C99 compliant in that area)
A+

[PATCH] Make wine build with the Intel CC

[Jonathan Schleifer]

Eric Pouech  wrote:
> it seems now the major hurdle is that icc doesn't support
> the inline conventions of GCC (and is likely C99 compliant in that

ICC supports gcc inline asm. But it doesn't support defining a symbol
twice.

[PATCH] Make wine build with the Intel CC

[Alexandre Julliard]

Jonathan Schleifer  writes:
> Eric Pouech  wrote:
> > it seems now the major hurdle is that icc doesn't support
> > the inline conventions of GCC (and is likely C99 compliant in that
>
> ICC supports gcc inline asm. But it doesn't support defining a symbol
> twice.

What version are you using?  According to the man page this is
supposed to be fixed in icc 9.1.

[PATCH] Make wine build with the Intel CC

[Eric Pouech]

Alexandre Julliard a écrit :
> Jonathan Schleifer  writes:
> > Eric Pouech  wrote:
> > > it seems now the major hurdle is that icc doesn't support
> > > the inline conventions of GCC (and is likely C99 compliant in that
> >
> > ICC supports gcc inline asm. But it doesn't support defining a symbol
> > twice.
>
> What version are you using?  According to the man page this is
> supposed to be fixed in icc 9.1.

it's fixed for C functions, but not when the function is declared in 
assembly
extern inline int foo(int a);
extern inline int foo(int a) {return a + 1;}
int foo(int a) {return a+1;}
extern inline int ffo(int a);
extern inline int ffo(int a) {return a + 1;}
int ffo(int a) {return a+1;}
__asm__( ".text\n\t"
         ".align 4\n\t"
         ".globl ffo\n\t"
         ".type ffo,@function\n"
         "ffo:\n\tret\n"
         "\n\t.previous" );

[eric@localhost wine-git]$ /opt2/intel/cc/9.1.047/bin/icc -c  ~/icc2.c
/home/eric/icc2.c(3): warning #290: function "foo" has already been defined
  int foo(int a) {return a+1;}
      ^

/home/eric/icc2.c(6): warning #290: function "ffo" has already been defined
  int ffo(int a) {return a+1;}
      ^

IPO: WARNING: File scope asm disables -ipo
/home/eric/tmp/icc5IgzlBas_.s: Assembler messages:
/home/eric/tmp/icc5IgzlBas_.s:40: Error: symbol `ffo' is already defined

(and embedding the asm code into a dummy function doesn't help either)

A+

[PATCH] Make wine build with the Intel CC

[Alexandre Julliard]

Eric Pouech  writes:
> it's fixed for C functions, but not when the function is declared in
> assembly
> extern inline int foo(int a);
> extern inline int foo(int a) {return a + 1;}
> int foo(int a) {return a+1;}
> extern inline int ffo(int a);
> extern inline int ffo(int a) {return a + 1;}
> int ffo(int a) {return a+1;}
> __asm__( ".text\n\t"
>         ".align 4\n\t"
>         ".globl ffo\n\t"
>         ".type ffo,@function\n"
>         "ffo:\n\tret\n"
>         "\n\t.previous" );
>
> [eric@localhost wine-git]$ /opt2/intel/cc/9.1.047/bin/icc -c  ~/icc2.c
> /home/eric/icc2.c(3): warning #290: function "foo" has already been defined
>  int foo(int a) {return a+1;}
>      ^
>
> /home/eric/icc2.c(6): warning #290: function "ffo" has already been defined
>  int ffo(int a) {return a+1;}
>      ^
>
> IPO: WARNING: File scope asm disables -ipo
> /home/eric/tmp/icc5IgzlBas_.s: Assembler messages:
> /home/eric/tmp/icc5IgzlBas_.s:40: Error: symbol `ffo' is already defined
>
> (and embedding the asm code into a dummy function doesn't help either)

But here you really have two non-inline definitions, one in C and one
in assembly. What happens if you remove the C version?

[PATCH] Make wine build with the Intel CC

[Eric Pouech]

Alexandre Julliard a écrit :
> But here you really have two non-inline definitions, one in C and one
> in assembly. What happens if you remove the C version?

sorry, I redid my week end tests and went too fast
the real "bad" case is:

/* case with 2 C declarations */
extern inline int foo(int a);
extern inline int foo(int a) {return a + 1;}
int tfoo(int b)
{
        return foo(b) * b;
}
int foo(int a) {return a+1;}

/* case with C & ASM declarations */
extern inline int ffo(int a);
extern inline int ffo(int a) {return a + 1;}
int tffo(int f)
{
        return ffo(f) * f;
}
__asm__( ".text\n\t"
         ".align 4\n\t"
         ".globl ffo\n\t"
         ".type ffo,@function\n"
         "ffo:\n\tret\n"
         "\n\t.previous" );
[eric@localhost wine-git]$ /opt2/intel/cc/9.1.047/bin/icc -c -O2 ~/icc2.c
/home/eric/icc2.c(7): warning #290: function "foo" has already been defined
  int foo(int a) {return a+1;}
      ^

IPO: WARNING: File scope asm disables -ipo
/home/eric/tmp/iccTSWeMaas_.s: Assembler messages:
/home/eric/tmp/iccTSWeMaas_.s:86: Error: symbol `ffo' is already defined

we don't get the error if the inline function is not inlined
changing the order of asm def & inline usage doesn't change the output 
either

A+

[PATCH] Make wine build with the Intel CC

[Jonathan Schleifer]

Alexandre Julliard  wrote:
> What version are you using?  According to the man page this is
> supposed to be fixed in icc 9.1.

I'm using ICC 9.1:

asgard:~$ icc --version
icc (ICC) 9.1 20060706

[PATCH] Make wine build with the Intel CC

[Eric Pouech]

Jonathan Schleifer a écrit :
> Eric Pouech  wrote:
> > it seems now the major hurdle is that icc doesn't support
> > the inline conventions of GCC (and is likely C99 compliant in that
>
> ICC supports gcc inline asm. But it doesn't support defining a symbol
> twice.

I'm speaking of the inline keyword (especially about extern inline)

A+

[PATCH] Make wine build with the Intel CC

[Rolf Kalbermatter]

Eric Pouech [mailto:[e-mail]] wrote:
> > Jonathan Schleifer a écrit :
> > ICC supports gcc inline asm. But it doesn't support defining a symbol 
> > twice.
>
> I'm speaking of the inline keyword (especially about extern inline)

Same issue as at least Visual C 6.0 had for standard C code.

Rolf Kalbermatter