Re: Change in Linaro Toolchain naming

2011-08-11 Thread Michael Hope
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 7:42 PM, Peter Maydell wrote: > On 11 August 2011 05:25, Michael Hope wrote: >> Hi there.  This is a heads-up that the name of the Toolchain group >> releases will change slightly with next weeks release.  We're dropping >> the respin suffix (the -0) to line up with the ne

Standard GCC configurations

2011-08-11 Thread Michael Hope
Hi there. I've written up the standard configurations that we use to build and test Linaro GCC: https://wiki.linaro.org/WorkingGroups/ToolChain/Configurations/GCC It includes such things as flags, libraries, and sysroots. You might find it useful to see what we're testing or, if new to compiler

Re: What are the chances of a phone based developer image

2011-08-11 Thread Mike Hommey
On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 07:32:51PM -0300, Christian Robottom Reis wrote: > On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 03:08:53PM -0700, Taras Glek wrote: > > >You should definitely be trying to build using the Linaro 4.5 and 4.6 > > >compiler branches; they are pretty much guaranteed to give you better > > >performan

Re: RFC: Saving and restoring the assembler state during assembly

2011-08-11 Thread Dave Martin
Hi, On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 4:22 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote: > Dave Martin writes: >> However, there's not really anything fundamentally >> architecture-specific about this problem, and ideally the solution and >> the directives should not be architecture-specific either. >> One option which ap

Re: RFC: Saving and restoring the assembler state during assembly

2011-08-11 Thread Richard Sandiford
Dave Martin writes: > However, there's not really anything fundamentally > architecture-specific about this problem, and ideally the solution and > the directives should not be architecture-specific either. > One option which appeals to me is to have some directives which can > exist across all ar

RFC: Saving and restoring the assembler state during assembly

2011-08-11 Thread Dave Martin
Hi all, On ARM, we've now hit the problem a few times of temporarily overriding the assembler state (or rather, not being able to do this reliably). For example, sometimes there's a need to assemble a few instructions for a different architecture version so we can optionally execute or skip them

[ACTIVITY] August 7-11

2011-08-11 Thread Ira Rosen
Hi, * fixed PR 50014 and 50039 - to be backported to linaro-gcc * tested the patch to change the default vector size on NEON * found one test that fails with quad-words - gcc.c-torture/execute/mode-dependent-address.c. Debugging it with Ramana. * started looking into widening shifts Vacation plan

Re: Change in Linaro Toolchain naming

2011-08-11 Thread Peter Maydell
On 11 August 2011 05:25, Michael Hope wrote: > Hi there.  This is a heads-up that the name of the Toolchain group > releases will change slightly with next weeks release.  We're dropping > the respin suffix (the -0) to line up with the new whole of Linaro > naming convention. So I still don't rea