On 31/05/18 11:08, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
On Tue, 29 May 2018 11:02:58 PDT (-0700), Jim Wilson wrote:
On 05/26/2018 06:04 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
Why is the default multilib and a variant identical?
This is supposed to be a single multilib, with two names. We use
MULTILIB_REUSE to map the
On 29/05/18 20:02, Jim Wilson wrote:
Most variants include the C extension. Would it be possible to add
-march=rv32g and -march=rv64g variants?
The expectation is that most implementations will include the C
extension. It reduces code size, improves performance, and I think I
read somewhere
Snapshot gcc-7-20180531 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/7-20180531/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 7 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches/gcc-7
On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 7:23 AM, Matthew Fortune
wrote:
> I do actually have a solution for this but it is not submitted upstream.
> MIPS has basically the same set of problems that RISC-V does in this area
> and in an ideal world there would be no 'fallback' multilib such that if
> you use compil
> On May 31, 2018, at 12:35 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
>
> On Tue, 29 May 2018, Paul Koning wrote:
>
>> Question about proper target maintainer procedures...
>>
>> The pdp11 target needs udivhi3 in libgcc. There's udivsi3, and it's
>> really easy to tweak those files for HImode. And that wor
On Tue, 29 May 2018, Paul Koning wrote:
> Question about proper target maintainer procedures...
>
> The pdp11 target needs udivhi3 in libgcc. There's udivsi3, and it's
> really easy to tweak those files for HImode. And that works.
>
> Should I add the HI files to the libgcc directory, or unde
On Tue, 29 May 2018, Richard Biener wrote:
> The testcase dates back to some repository creation rev. (egcs?) and
> I'm not sure we may compute the difference of addresses of structure
> members. So that GCC accepts this is probably not required. Joseph
> may have a definitive answer here.
My m
Palmer Dabbelt writes:
> On Tue, 29 May 2018 11:02:58 PDT (-0700), Jim Wilson wrote:
> > On 05/26/2018 06:04 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> >> Why is the default multilib and a variant identical?
> >
> > This is supposed to be a single multilib, with two names. We use
> > MULTILIB_REUSE to map the
Okay, I think I can withdraw the suggestion. It is apparently not providing a
stable end performance.
I would like to end with sharing the measurements I made that motivated me to
suggest the change. Hopefully it can be useful if tree-slp-vectorize gets
improved and the suggestion comes up agai
(Missed this thread initially due to incorrect email address)
> On 29 May 2018, at 11:05, Richard Sandiford
> wrote:
>
> Jeff Law writes:
>> Now that we're in stage1 I do want to revisit the CLOBBER_HIGH stuff.
>> When we left things I think we were trying to decide between
>> CLOBBER_HIGH and
On Tue, 29 May 2018 11:02:58 PDT (-0700), Jim Wilson wrote:
On 05/26/2018 06:04 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
Why is the default multilib and a variant identical?
This is supposed to be a single multilib, with two names. We use
MULTILIB_REUSE to map the two names to a single multilib.
rohan:103
11 matches
Mail list logo
