[PATCH] RISC-V: Using fmv.x.w/fmv.w.x rather than fmv.x.s/fmv.s.x

2020-02-17 Thread Kito Cheng
- fmv.x.s/fmv.s.x renamed to fmv.x.w/fmv.w.x in the latest RISC-V ISA manual. - Tested rv32gc/rv64gc on bare-metal with qemu. ChangeLog gcc/ Kito Cheng * config/riscv/riscv.c (riscv_output_move) Using fmv.x.w/fmv.w.x rather than fmv.x.s/fmv.s.x. --- gcc/config/riscv/ris

Re: [PATCH] RISC-V: Using fmv.x.w/fmv.w.x rather than fmv.x.s/fmv.s.x

2020-02-18 Thread Jim Wilson
On Mon, Feb 17, 2020 at 9:57 PM Kito Cheng wrote: > * config/riscv/riscv.c (riscv_output_move) Using fmv.x.w/fmv.w.x > rather than fmv.x.s/fmv.s.x. Looks good to me also. By the way, since you are listed as one of the riscv port maintainers, you could make changes like this witho

Re: [PATCH] RISC-V: Using fmv.x.w/fmv.w.x rather than fmv.x.s/fmv.s.x

2020-02-18 Thread Kito Cheng
Committed. Hi Jim: Thanks for your review and reply, I'll commit directly for such simple patch in future :) On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 7:33 AM Jim Wilson wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 17, 2020 at 9:57 PM Kito Cheng wrote: > > * config/riscv/riscv.c (riscv_output_move) Using fmv.x.w/fmv.w.x > >

Re: [PATCH] RISC-V: Using fmv.x.w/fmv.w.x rather than fmv.x.s/fmv.s.x

2020-03-17 Thread Maciej W. Rozycki via Gcc-patches
On Tue, 18 Feb 2020, Kito Cheng wrote: > - fmv.x.s/fmv.s.x renamed to fmv.x.w/fmv.w.x in the latest RISC-V ISA >manual. The new mnemonics have been supported by GAS for a little while now and the old ones have been retained, however this is still a change that breaks backwards compatibili

Re: [PATCH] RISC-V: Using fmv.x.w/fmv.w.x rather than fmv.x.s/fmv.s.x

2020-03-18 Thread Jim Wilson
On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 2:42 PM Maciej W. Rozycki wrote: > On Tue, 18 Feb 2020, Kito Cheng wrote: > > - fmv.x.s/fmv.s.x renamed to fmv.x.w/fmv.w.x in the latest RISC-V ISA > >manual. > > The new mnemonics have been supported by GAS for a little while now and > the old ones have been retained

Re: [PATCH] RISC-V: Using fmv.x.w/fmv.w.x rather than fmv.x.s/fmv.s.x

2020-03-18 Thread Maciej W. Rozycki via Gcc-patches
On Wed, 18 Mar 2020, Jim Wilson wrote: > > The new mnemonics have been supported by GAS for a little while now and > > the old ones have been retained, however this is still a change that > > breaks backwards compatibility. So I wonder if we shouldn't have an > > autoconf test included for this