On 2013/12/28 02:29 PM, Chung-Lin Tang wrote:
On 13/12/23 12:54 AM, Chung-Lin Tang wrote:
Other than these two, I think this can go in.
Bernd
Attached is the updated patch for the compiler.
Since Bernd is a Global Reviewer, am I clear for committing the port
now? (including the testsuite
On 13/12/23 12:54 AM, Chung-Lin Tang wrote:
Other than these two, I think this can go in.
Bernd
Attached is the updated patch for the compiler.
Since Bernd is a Global Reviewer, am I clear for committing the port
now? (including the testsuite and libgcc parts)
I will be taking Bernd's
On 11/26/2013 07:45 AM, Chung-Lin Tang wrote:
+(define_insn movhi_internal
+ [(set (match_operand:HI 0 nonimmediate_operand =m, r,r, r,r)
+(match_operand:HI 1 general_operand rM,m,rM,I,J))]
Didn't you say you'd removed the J alternative?
+error (only register based stack
Ping x3.
On 13/12/10 12:57 PM, Chung-Lin Tang wrote:
Ping x2.
On 2013/12/5 12:19 PM, Chung-Lin Tang wrote:
Ping.
On 2013/11/26 02:45 PM, Chung-Lin Tang wrote:
Hi Bernd,
I've updated the patch again, please see if it looks fit for approval
now. Including ChangeLog again for completeness.
Ping x2.
On 2013/12/5 12:19 PM, Chung-Lin Tang wrote:
Ping.
On 2013/11/26 02:45 PM, Chung-Lin Tang wrote:
Hi Bernd,
I've updated the patch again, please see if it looks fit for approval
now. Including ChangeLog again for completeness.
Thanks,
Chung-Lin
2013-11-26 Chung-Lin Tang
Ping.
On 2013/11/26 02:45 PM, Chung-Lin Tang wrote:
Hi Bernd,
I've updated the patch again, please see if it looks fit for approval
now. Including ChangeLog again for completeness.
Thanks,
Chung-Lin
2013-11-26 Chung-Lin Tang clt...@codesourcery.com
Sandra Loosemore
On 11/16/2013 11:01 AM, Chung-Lin Tang wrote:
My response to the various issues you raised are below. The new patch
has been re-tested. Please see if you can approve for committing now.
I agree with all the comments Richard has been making, so I'll just add
a few other points.
If you don't
On 13/11/22 10:31 PM, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
If you don't object, I'll keep the clobbers there for now.
If they serve no purpose (and I think they don't), they should go.
I'll check again, but I remember df_regs_ever_live_p doesn't include the
RA reg if the call pattern doesn't have the
On 2013/11/21 03:25 PM, Richard Henderson wrote:
On 11/21/2013 02:41 PM, Chung-Lin Tang wrote:
I'm not saying we tolerate wrong RTL form, but rather that, it should
be an issue of the RTL passes, not the backend. The backend should just
be as much as possible, a machine description.
On 13/11/20 1:34 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
Chung-Lin Tang clt...@codesourcery.com writes:
+;; Integer logical Operations
+
+(define_code_iterator LOGICAL [and ior xor])
+(define_code_attr logical_asm [(and and) (ior or) (xor xor)])
+
+(define_insn codesi3
+ [(set (match_operand:SI 0
Chung-Lin Tang clt...@codesourcery.com writes:
On 13/11/20 1:34 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
Chung-Lin Tang clt...@codesourcery.com writes:
+;; Integer logical Operations
+
+(define_code_iterator LOGICAL [and ior xor])
+(define_code_attr logical_asm [(and and) (ior or) (xor xor)])
+
On 13/11/21 7:21 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
Chung-Lin Tang clt...@codesourcery.com writes:
On 13/11/20 1:34 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
Chung-Lin Tang clt...@codesourcery.com writes:
+;; Integer logical Operations
+
+(define_code_iterator LOGICAL [and ior xor])
+(define_code_attr
On 11/21/2013 02:41 PM, Chung-Lin Tang wrote:
I'm not saying we tolerate wrong RTL form, but rather that, it should
be an issue of the RTL passes, not the backend. The backend should just
be as much as possible, a machine description.
Matching non-canonical rtl does nothing but slow down the
On Tue, 19 Nov 2013, Chung-Lin Tang wrote:
Okay, then. I've updated the GCC backend patch to put the
TARGET_INITIALIZER stuff at the end. I've shuffled some of the routines
to reduce the starting forward declarations, though some do remain.
The ChangeLog is the same, so I haven't
Chung-Lin Tang clt...@codesourcery.com writes:
+;; Integer logical Operations
+
+(define_code_iterator LOGICAL [and ior xor])
+(define_code_attr logical_asm [(and and) (ior or) (xor xor)])
+
+(define_insn codesi3
+ [(set (match_operand:SI 0 register_operand =r,r,r)
+
On Sat, 16 Nov 2013, Chung-Lin Tang wrote:
+/* Local prototypes. */
I'd much prefer not to have any of those. Achieve this by putting
+struct gcc_target targetm = TARGET_INITIALIZER;
along with all the necessary definitions at the end of the file (and
reordering some other
On 07/14/2013 09:54 AM, Chung-Lin Tang wrote:
Hi, the last ping of the Nios II patches was:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-06/msg01416.html
After assessing the state, we feel it would be better to post a
re-submission of the newest patches.
Since this hasn't attracted attention for
On 09/02/13 13:23, Sebastian Huber wrote:
what is the blocking point for GCC integration? It was accepted by the SC and
all issues of the last review have been addressed (at least this is my
impression). Is it that none of the persons with global write permission seems
to be responsible?
Ping.
On 13/8/20 10:57 AM, Chung-Lin Tang wrote:
Ping.
BTW, the SC has approved the Nios II port already:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2013-07/msg00434.html
The port is still awaiting technical review.
Thanks,
Chung-Lin
On 13/7/14 下午3:54, Chung-Lin Tang wrote:
Hi, the last ping of
Hello,
what is the blocking point for GCC integration? It was accepted by the SC and
all issues of the last review have been addressed (at least this is my
impression). Is it that none of the persons with global write permission seems
to be responsible? The Binutils port is available since
Ping.
BTW, the SC has approved the Nios II port already:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2013-07/msg00434.html
The port is still awaiting technical review.
Thanks,
Chung-Lin
On 13/7/14 下午3:54, Chung-Lin Tang wrote:
Hi, the last ping of the Nios II patches was:
21 matches
Mail list logo
