Hey,
On Tue, 6 Jun 2023, Umesh Kalappa via Gcc wrote:
> Question is : Why does GCC choose to use GPR's here and have any
> reference to support this decision ?
You explicitely used -m32 ppc, so
https://www.polyomino.org.uk/publications/2011/Power-Arch-32-bit-ABI-supp-1.0-Unified.pdf
On Tue, Jun 6, 2023 at 1:08 PM Umesh Kalappa via Gcc
wrote:
> Hi Segher ,
>
> >>What did you expect, what happened instead?
> For example the complex args are passed in GPR's for cexp in the case
> GCC and Clang uses caller memory .
>
> for reference : https://godbolt.org/z/MfMz3cTe7
>
> We
On Tue, 6 Jun 2023, Andrew Pinski via Gcc wrote:
> You are looking at the wrong ABI document.
> That is for the 64bit ABI.
> The 32bit ABI document is located at:
> http://refspecs.linux-foundation.org/elf/elfspec_ppc.pdf
>
> Plus the 32bit ABI document does not document Complex argument passing
Hi Segher ,
>>What did you expect, what happened instead?
For example the complex args are passed in GPR's for cexp in the case
GCC and Clang uses caller memory .
for reference : https://godbolt.org/z/MfMz3cTe7
We have cross tools like some of libraries built using the GCC and
some use
Hi!
On Tue, Jun 06, 2023 at 08:35:22PM +0530, Umesh Kalappa wrote:
> Hi Adnrew,
> Thank you for the quick response and for PPC64 too ,we do have
> mismatches in ABI b/w complex operations like
> https://godbolt.org/z/bjsYovx4c .
>
> Any reason why GCC chose to use GPR 's here ?
What did you
On Tue, Jun 6, 2023 at 8:05 AM Umesh Kalappa wrote:
>
> Hi Adnrew,
> Thank you for the quick response and for PPC64 too ,we do have
> mismatches in ABI b/w complex operations like
> https://godbolt.org/z/bjsYovx4c .
>
> Any reason why GCC chose to use GPR 's here ?
Yes because it was set before
Hi Adnrew,
Thank you for the quick response and for PPC64 too ,we do have
mismatches in ABI b/w complex operations like
https://godbolt.org/z/bjsYovx4c .
Any reason why GCC chose to use GPR 's here ?
~Umesh
On Tue, Jun 6, 2023 at 8:28 PM Andrew Pinski wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jun 6, 2023 at 7:50 AM
On Tue, Jun 6, 2023 at 7:50 AM Umesh Kalappa via Libc-alpha
wrote:
>
> Hi all ,
>
> For the test case https://godbolt.org/z/vjs1vfs5W ,we see the mismatch
> in the ABI b/w gcc and clang .
>
> Do we have any supporting documents that second the GCC behaviour over CLANG ?
>
> EABI states like
>
>
Hi all ,
For the test case https://godbolt.org/z/vjs1vfs5W ,we see the mismatch
in the ABI b/w gcc and clang .
Do we have any supporting documents that second the GCC behaviour over CLANG ?
EABI states like
In the Power Architecture 64-Bit ELF V2 ABI Specification document
(v1.1 from 16 July
