On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 10:02 PM, Joseph S. Myers
<jos...@codesourcery.com> wrote:
> Continuing the cleanups of libgcc soft-fp configuration for
> powerpc*-*-linux* in preparation for implementing
> TARGET_ATOMIC_ASSIGN_EXPAND_FENV for soft-float and e500, this patch
> optimizes the choice of which functions to build for the 32-bit
> classic hard-float and soft-float cases.  (e500 will be dealt with in
> a separate patch which will need to add new features to t-hardfp and
> t-softfp; this patch keeps the status quo for e500.)
>
> For hard-float, while the functions in question are part of the libgcc
> ABI there is no need for them to contain software floating point code:
> no newly built code should use them, and if anything does use them
> it's most efficient (space and speed) for them to pass straight
> through to floating-point hardware instructions; this case is made to
> use t-hardfp to achieve that.  For soft-float, direct use of soft-fp
> functions for operations involving DImode or unsigned integers is more
> efficient than using the libgcc2.c versions of those operations to
> convert to operations on other types (which then end up calling
> soft-fp functions for those other types, possibly more than once);
> this case is thus stopped from using t-softfp-excl.  (A future patch
> will stop the e500 cases from using t-softfp-excl as well.)
>
> Tested with no regressions for crosses to powerpc-linux-gnu (soft
> float and classic hard float); also checked that the same set of
> symbols and versions is exported from shared libgcc before and after
> the patch.  OK to commit?
>
> 2014-10-23  Joseph Myers  <jos...@codesourcery.com>
>
>         * configure.ac (ppc_fp_type): Set variable on powerpc*-*-linux*.
>         * configure: Regenerate.
>         * config.host (powerpc*-*-linux*): Use $ppc_fp_type to determine
>         additions to tmake_file.  Use t-hardfp-sfdf and t-hardfp instead
>         of soft-fp for 32-bit classic hard float.  Do not use
>         t-softfp-excl for soft float.

Okay.

Thanks, David

Reply via email to