On 21 March 2011 14:09, Nathan Froyd wrote:
> I'm just concerned about what would happen if we turned on softfloat's
> "float types are structure types" bit; I'm pretty sure everything would
> break horribly on targets that don't pass small structures in
> registers. Admittedly, several targets w
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 02:04:31PM +, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 21 March 2011 13:48, Nathan Froyd wrote:
> > I like the direction this patch goes; you aren't by any chance going to
> > convert the passing/returning of float* to their appropriate int* types
> > too, are you?
>
> Nope -- I thin
On 21 March 2011 13:48, Nathan Froyd wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 05:23:11PM +, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> Correct the argument and return types for the float<->int conversion helper
>> functions so that integer arguments and return values are declared as
>> uint32_t/uint64_t, not float32/flo
On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 05:23:11PM +, Peter Maydell wrote:
> Correct the argument and return types for the float<->int conversion helper
> functions so that integer arguments and return values are declared as
> uint32_t/uint64_t, not float32/float64. This allows us to remove the
> hand-rolled f
Correct the argument and return types for the float<->int conversion helper
functions so that integer arguments and return values are declared as
uint32_t/uint64_t, not float32/float64. This allows us to remove the
hand-rolled functions which were doing bitwise copies between the types
via unions.
