On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 01:23:14AM +, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
What about 64-bit targets? We can sometimes access doubles using GPRs,
so on 64-bit targets we could end up using LD and SD to access a double
even when this option disables LDC1 and SDC1. I think we'd need to
patch the
On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 07:46:43PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
up with a couple of options:
1) Enhance the _builtin_trap() function so that we can specify the
break code that is emitted. This would allow us to do something
like:
static inline void
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 01:10:10PM -0700, David Daney wrote:
Among the versions of GCC that can build the current kernel, will any
fail on this code because the i constraint cannot be matched when
expanded to RTL?
Someone will point this out if I don't, so for avoidance of doubt:
this needs
On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 11:48:53AM +, Andrew Haley wrote:
David Daney writes:
With the current kernel (2.6.23.1) in my R5000 based O2 it seems
impossible for GCC's exception unwinding machinery to unwind through
signal frames. The cause of the problems is the
On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 02:14:58PM +0100, Franck Bui-Huu wrote:
David Daney writes:
With the current kernel (2.6.23.1) in my R5000 based O2 it seems
impossible for GCC's exception unwinding machinery to unwind through
signal frames. The cause of the problems is the
On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 03:22:33PM +0100, Franck Bui-Huu wrote:
And the stack wouldn't need to have exec permission anymore.
Oh?
extern void frob(void (*)(void));
int foo(void)
{
int x;
void bar(void)
{
x++;
}
On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 03:37:39PM +0100, Kevin D. Kissell wrote:
True, though it should perhaps be noted that currently it's only on 4KSc/Sd
systems (which I know you work on) where it's even possible for the stack
*not* to have exec permissions, since the classical MIPS MMU gives
execute
On Tue, Sep 18, 2007 at 05:12:48PM -0700, David Daney wrote:
There seems to be a small problem with the MIPS atomic memory operations
patch I recently committed
(http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-08/msg01290.html), in that on a
dual CPU machine it does not quite work.
You can look
On Wed, Sep 19, 2007 at 07:12:33PM +0100, Thiemo Seufer wrote:
Another option is to depend on the setting of -mbranch-likely. By
default it is on only for the processors which implement it and do not
discourage it, i.e. these of the MIPS II, MIPS III and MIPS IV ISAs.
All MIPS
In an OS kernel functions that do not return are commonly used and
practically always their code is beyond gcc's ability to recognize
noreturn functions. A typical example would for example be the BUG()
function in Linux which is implemented as something like:
static inline void
On Tue, Feb 06, 2007 at 04:44:50PM -0200, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
* You can add a return 0 or an exit(1) at the end of the function or
in a default label. Since in your case the code is unreachable, the
optimiser may remove it or it will never be executed.
But this would generate
11 matches
Mail list logo
