Re: [PATCH 2/2] Add leon3r0 and leon3r0v7 CPU targets

2015-07-03 Thread Daniel Cederman
One could add a -mtune-fpu switch. Did you look at other architectures in the GCC tree that would have similar requirements? Thank you for the suggestion about adding a -mtune-fpu switch. I have not yet looked at the other architectures, but will do so before proceeding. -- Daniel Cederman

Re: [PATCH 2/2] Add leon3r0 and leon3r0v7 CPU targets

2015-07-03 Thread Eric Botcazou
> Thank you for the patch in your other mail that changes this! You're welcome. > We were also thinking of the instruction timing information found in the > leon_costs and leon3_costs. We took a look at the values in leon_costs > and they seem to fit well with the UT699, except for division. We g

Re: [PATCH 2/2] Add leon3r0 and leon3r0v7 CPU targets

2015-06-30 Thread Daniel Cederman
On 2015-06-30 11:24, Eric Botcazou wrote: The UT699 is a leon3r0 system which does not support CASA. However, to enable the errata fixes for UT699 with -mfix-ut699 requires the CPU target to be leon3. -mfix-ut699 itself is independent of the processor and doesn't require leon3. The instructio

Re: [PATCH 2/2] Add leon3r0 and leon3r0v7 CPU targets

2015-06-30 Thread Eric Botcazou
> Yes, there is only one optimization trick for the scheduler that requires > leon3, but it doesn't affect correctness. We could easily change that, i.e. > enable the trick for leon too if -mfix-ut699 is passed. Like this, applied on all branches. 2015-06-30 Eric Botcazou * config/s

Re: [PATCH 2/2] Add leon3r0 and leon3r0v7 CPU targets

2015-06-30 Thread Eric Botcazou
> The UT699 is a leon3r0 system which does not support CASA. However, to > enable the errata fixes for UT699 with -mfix-ut699 requires the CPU > target to be leon3. -mfix-ut699 itself is independent of the processor and doesn't require leon3. > The instruction timing also differs between leon and

Re: [PATCH 2/2] Add leon3r0 and leon3r0v7 CPU targets

2015-06-26 Thread Daniel Cederman
On 2015-06-26 09:45, Eric Botcazou wrote: Early variants of LEON3, revision 0, do not support the CASA instruction. This patch adds two new targets, leon3r0 and leon3r0v7, that are equivalent to leon3 and leon3v7, except that they do not support CASA. Why not use leon instead of leon3 for the

Re: [PATCH 2/2] Add leon3r0 and leon3r0v7 CPU targets

2015-06-26 Thread Eric Botcazou
> Early variants of LEON3, revision 0, do not support the CASA instruction. > This patch adds two new targets, leon3r0 and leon3r0v7, that are equivalent > to leon3 and leon3v7, except that they do not support CASA. Why not use leon instead of leon3 for them? -- Eric Botcazou

[PATCH 2/2] Add leon3r0 and leon3r0v7 CPU targets

2015-06-23 Thread Daniel Cederman
Early variants of LEON3, revision 0, do not support the CASA instruction. This patch adds two new targets, leon3r0 and leon3r0v7, that are equivalent to leon3 and leon3v7, except that they do not support CASA. gcc/ChangeLog: 2015-06-22 Daniel Cederman * config.gcc: Add leon3r0[v7] tar