On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 07:39:43PM +0200, Bernhard Schommer wrote:
> Does anyone know the reason why the gcc passes the argument as single float?
That's how the first powerpc gcc implementation behaved. Once gcc
compiled code is out in the field, you need to ask everyone to
recompile their code i
I advise looking at the "Power Architecture® 32-bit Application Binary
Interface Supplement 1.0 - Embedded", not any older EABI documents.
There may well be bugs in this ABI document (i.e. it may fail to reflect
actual practice), but it's still more reliable as a guide to current
practice than
Snapshot gcc-5-20150922 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/5-20150922/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 5 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches/gcc-5
On 09/22/15 04:52, David Chisnall wrote:
> On 22 Sep 2015, at 12:47, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>
>> since __builtin_exception_error () is the same as
>> __builtin_return_address (0) and __builtin_interrupt_data () is
>> address of __builtin_exception_error () + size of register.
>
> Except that they’re *no
On 09/22/15 04:44, David Chisnall wrote:
> On 22 Sep 2015, at 12:39, H.J. Lu via cfe-dev wrote:
>>
>> The center piece of my proposal is not to change how parameters
>> are passed in compiler. As for user experience, the feedbacks on
>> my proposal from our users are very positive.
>
> Implement
On 09/22/15 01:41, David Chisnall wrote:
> On 21 Sep 2015, at 21:45, H.J. Lu via cfe-dev wrote:
>>
>> The main purpose of x86 interrupt attribute is to allow programmers
>> to write x86 interrupt/exception handlers in C WITHOUT assembly
>> stubs to avoid extra branch from assembly stubs to C funct
On 09/21/2015 04:03 PM, Hal Finkel wrote:
> - Original Message -
>> From: "H.J. Lu"
>> To: "Hal Finkel"
>> Cc: "GCC Development" , cfe-...@lists.llvm.org
>> Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 5:57:36 PM
>> Subject: Re: [cfe-dev] RFC: Support x86 interrupt and exception handlers
>>
>> On Mon
Am 22.09.2015 um 19:43 schrieb David Edelsohn:
On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 1:39 PM, Bernhard Schommer
wrote:
Hi,
if been working with the windriver Diab c compiler for 32bit ppc for and
encountered an incompatibly with the eabi version of the gcc 4.83. When
calling functions with more than 8 floa
On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 1:39 PM, Bernhard Schommer
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> if been working with the windriver Diab c compiler for 32bit ppc for and
> encountered an incompatibly with the eabi version of the gcc 4.83. When
> calling functions with more than 8 float arguments the gcc stores the 9th
> floa
Hi,
if been working with the windriver Diab c compiler for 32bit ppc for and
encountered an incompatibly with the eabi version of the gcc 4.83. When
calling functions with more than 8 float arguments the gcc stores the 9th
float argument (and so on) as a float where as the diab compiler stores th
On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 05:44:59PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 05:55:10PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > Hello!
> >
> > Following up on last year's discussion (https://lwn.net/Articles/586838/,
> > https://lwn.net/Articles/588300/), I believe that we have a solutio
On 22 Sep 2015, at 12:47, H.J. Lu wrote:
>
> since __builtin_exception_error () is the same as
> __builtin_return_address (0) and __builtin_interrupt_data () is
> address of __builtin_exception_error () + size of register.
Except that they’re *not*. __builtin_return_address(0) is guaranteed to
On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 4:44 AM, David Chisnall
wrote:
> On 22 Sep 2015, at 12:39, H.J. Lu via cfe-dev wrote:
>>
>> The center piece of my proposal is not to change how parameters
>> are passed in compiler. As for user experience, the feedbacks on
>> my proposal from our users are very positive.
On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 1:41 AM, David Chisnall
wrote:
> On 21 Sep 2015, at 21:45, H.J. Lu via cfe-dev wrote:
>>
>> The main purpose of x86 interrupt attribute is to allow programmers
>> to write x86 interrupt/exception handlers in C WITHOUT assembly
>> stubs to avoid extra branch from assembly s
On 22 Sep 2015, at 12:39, H.J. Lu via cfe-dev wrote:
>
> The center piece of my proposal is not to change how parameters
> are passed in compiler. As for user experience, the feedbacks on
> my proposal from our users are very positive.
Implementing the intrinsics for getting the current interru
On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 1:11 AM, Hal Finkel wrote:
> - Original Message -
>> From: "H.J. Lu"
>> To: "Hal Finkel"
>> Cc: "GCC Development" , cfe-...@lists.llvm.org
>> Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 7:17:20 PM
>> Subject: Re: [cfe-dev] RFC: Support x86 interrupt and exception handlers
>>
On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 12:45 PM, Simon Dardis wrote:
> I took an attempt at addressing this through the RTL GCSE pass. This attempt
> tweaks
> mem_attrs_eq_p to return true if its comparing something like poly+8 and MEM
> [&poly + 8].
>
> Is this a more suitable approach?
I actually recently m
I took an attempt at addressing this through the RTL GCSE pass. This attempt
tweaks
mem_attrs_eq_p to return true if its comparing something like poly+8 and MEM
[&poly + 8].
Is this a more suitable approach?
Thanks,
Simon
+/* Return true if p and q reference the same location by the same name
On 21 Sep 2015, at 21:45, H.J. Lu via cfe-dev wrote:
>
> The main purpose of x86 interrupt attribute is to allow programmers
> to write x86 interrupt/exception handlers in C WITHOUT assembly
> stubs to avoid extra branch from assembly stubs to C functions. I
> want to keep the number of new intr
On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 8:17 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Sep 2015, Daniel Gutson wrote:
>
>> This is derived from https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-help/2015-03/msg00091.html
>>
>> Currently, gcc provides an optimization that transforms a call to
>> malloc and a call to memset into a call to call
- Original Message -
> From: "H.J. Lu"
> To: "Hal Finkel"
> Cc: "GCC Development" , cfe-...@lists.llvm.org
> Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 7:17:20 PM
> Subject: Re: [cfe-dev] RFC: Support x86 interrupt and exception handlers
>
> On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 4:03 PM, Hal Finkel wrote:
> >
21 matches
Mail list logo
