> -----Original Message----- > From: Ramana Radhakrishnan [mailto:ramana....@googlemail.com] > Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2015 5:00 PM > To: Hale Wang > Cc: Ramana Radhakrishnan; Joseph Myers; GCC Patches > Subject: Re: [PATCH] [1/2] [ARM] [libgcc] Support RTABI half-precision > conversion functions. > > On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 9:32 AM, Hale Wang <hale.w...@arm.com> wrote: > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Ramana Radhakrishnan [mailto:ramana....@googlemail.com] > >> Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2015 3:50 PM > >> To: Joseph Myers > >> Cc: Hale Wang; GCC Patches > >> Subject: Re: [PATCH] [1/2] [ARM] [libgcc] Support RTABI > >> half-precision conversion functions. > >> > >> On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 12:25 PM, Joseph Myers > >> <jos...@codesourcery.com> wrote: > >> > On Mon, 13 Apr 2015, Hale Wang wrote: > >> > > >> >> Yes, you are right. It's my fault to add the "only" here. Thank > >> >> you to point out this. > >> >> Beside this, is this patch OK for you? > >> > > >> > I don't think it's a good idea for libgcc to include large pieces > >> > of assembly code generated by a compiler. Just compile the code > >> > with whatever options are needed at the time libgcc is built - > >> > possibly with #if conditionals to allow compiling different versions of > >> > the > code. > > > > Indeed, just compile the code with option '-mfloat-abi=soft' at the time > libgcc is build which can solve this problem. > > Or why not "conditionally" use the ``pcs'' attribute on the ARM port ? > That then means you don't need options magic on top ?
OK. I think your suggestion can solve this problem more clearly. I will resubmit a patch later. I think we can discard this patch this time. Thanks a lot. Hale > > Ramana
