On 23/03/15 19:34, John Tytgat wrote:
In message <alpine.WNT.2.00.1503222007240.5032@Jeffrey-PC>
           Jeffrey Lee <m...@phlamethrower.co.uk> wrote:

If you have any other comments/questions about the code then let me know.
VFP/NEON support in GCC has now floated to near the top of my list of
priorities, so until something knocks it off that spot I should be able to
dedicate a fair amount of my time to making whatever changes are necessary to
get things to a state where you're happy with them.

Thanks for the update on your earlier patch.  For me it will take some time
to digest & review this all.  Maybe another GCCSDK developer can help me
here.

One thing which is not clear to me : when using UnixLib as shared library,
do these combinations work:

  - your program (or other shared libraries) built without use of VFP
    + UnixLib as shared library built with VFP support
  - your program (or other shared libraries) built with use of VFP
    + UnixLib as shared library build without VFP support.

Or is this only supposed to be used for UnixLib as static library ?

I haven't actually tested this yet, but compiling code with
-mfpu=vfp shows that the soft-float ABI is still being used, i.e.,
floating point arguments and results are passed in integer registers. Ideally, if a program is compiled vfp (as indicated in the ELF header),
then the dynamic linker will look for libraries in a vfp folder, but
rather than producing an error if it fails to find one, it should fall
back to the soft float version. That way we only have to have vfp
versions of specific libraries that will benefit from vfp and not
needlessly duplicate those that don't.

Mixing library types should work, but to benefit from vfp libraries,
the program would have to be compiled vfp, otherwise the dynamic linker
would not be aware of it.

Lee.

_______________________________________________
GCCSDK mailing list gcc@gccsdk.riscos.info
Bugzilla: http://www.riscos.info/bugzilla/index.cgi
List Info: http://www.riscos.info/mailman/listinfo/gcc
Main Page: http://www.riscos.info/index.php/GCCSDK

Reply via email to