, I'll commit
it after testing.
Nico
From 89f5b4f1adc828bdc0628baa35166c1c9254b42e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Nico Erfurth n...@erfurth.eu
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2014 14:22:33 +0200
Subject: [PATCH 1/1] 16bit Thumb is not able to use tst with an immediate
value
r28315 introduced an arm optimization
Hi Sergio,
3 - Finally, since I'm still using FPC 2.6.2 I decided to upgrade to
2.7.1 and try to recompile the game, to see if the crash in the game was
gone.
But, with FPC 2.7.2 I simply can't compile the game, it gives errors in
the assembler stage.
Basically I get lots of errors
On 25.01.14 17:09, Florian Klaempfl wrote:
Still WIP :) But a lot of my commits from the last weeks are spin-offs
of the SSA work.
Together with all other improvements this results in significant better
code:
fpc -l -O3 sha256.pp -S2
Free Pascal Compiler version 2.6.2 [2013/02/12] for
On 02.01.14 12:51, Michael Ring wrote:
Checkin Comment was:
Optimized support for 32x32 = 64bit multiplications on ARM
This code uses UMULL and SMULL to perform the multiplications, which
take two 32bit source registers and two 32bit destination registers.
... umull is not supported
On 02.01.14 13:24, Nico Erfurth wrote:
On 02.01.14 12:51, Michael Ring wrote:
Checkin Comment was:
Optimized support for 32x32 = 64bit multiplications on ARM
This code uses UMULL and SMULL to perform the multiplications, which
take two 32bit source registers and two 32bit destination
On 02.01.14 14:35, Jonas Maebe wrote:
On 02 Jan 2014, at 14:11, Nico Erfurth wrote:
I've added a new CPU-feature flag CPUARM_HAS_UMULL and also used it for
the 64x64=64bit code.
I think it would be cleaner to also use it in
tarmaddnode.use_generic_mul32to64 (maybe it's also necessary
On 03.09.12 14:04, Sven Barth wrote:
It will be interesting to benchmark Delphi's ARM compiler once it comes
out as we had quite some work on the ARM optimizer in the last months
and so there is the chance that FPC performs better on ARM than Delphi :)
Well, AFAIK the Delphi compiler for ARM
On 25.07.12 15:35, Marcos Douglas wrote:
On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 10:25 AM, Marco van de Voort mar...@stack.nl wrote:
In our previous episode, Marcos Douglas said:
I would like to report some errors when I tried to compile the FPC
2.7.1 at revision 21969 (I am using Windows).
First step in
On 25.07.12 16:11, Gennadiy Poryev wrote:
On a side note, this only affects win32 (and possibly linux x86) target.
Win64 and Linux x64 compiles well yet. So, the fpc trunk once again became
non-selfhosting, despite the notion that it shouldn’t have been as such at
all :)
No, AFAICT it
On 16.07.12 09:22, Skybuck Flying wrote:
I also wonder how much of an optimization it actually is ? Maybe
0.01% more performance ?
Cache related optimizations are VERY hard to measure and depend on
overall context and used architecture. But as the L1-cache is one of the
most performance
On 14.07.12 01:44, Jonas Maebe wrote:
I've implemented an optimization that reorders the instance fields of
Delphi-style classes (and only of Delphi-style classes) to minimise
memory gaps caused by alignment differences and odd sizes. The effect is
the same as when you would change the order
On 07.07.12 12:24, Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho wrote:
On Sat, Jul 7, 2012 at 11:42 AM, Thomas Schatzl tom_at_w...@gmx.at wrote:
The revision you have does not support the rev instruction when using
-CpARMv6. Use -CpARMv5 (or no switch, as it is the default) to create the
(cross-)compiler.
12 matches
Mail list logo
