On Sun, 24 Nov 2019 10:10:51 -0700 Jeff Law <l...@redhat.com> wrote: > On 11/24/19 7:20 AM, Jozef Lawrynowicz wrote: > > On Sun, 17 Nov 2019 12:11:23 -0700 > > Jeff Law <l...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > >> On 11/7/19 2:34 PM, Jozef Lawrynowicz wrote: > >>> Given that MSP430 is a resource constrained, embedded target disabling > >>> transactional memory by default is a good idea to save on code size in > >>> the runtime library. > >>> > >>> It can still be enabled by passing --enable-tm-clone-registry (although > >>> as far > >>> as I understand the feature is fundamentally incompatible with MSP430 > >>> given > >>> reliance on libitm, lack of thread support without an OS and the memory > >>> limitations of the device. > >>> > >> I'm not a huge fan of making the default configurations behave > >> differently. But I can also see how something like TM in particular > >> isn't of much interest in the embedded space (hell, it's having trouble > >> getting real traction in the server space as well). > >> > >> May be a reasonable path forward is to add the configury bits, keep TM > >> on by default and create a different msp target which disables this stuff? > >> > > > > Ok fair enough, what would an acceptable form for a new target triplet look > > like? "msp430-*-elfbare"? > Yea, that seems reasonable. > > > > > Since we're into stage 3 now I'll look at doing this for GCC 11. > I'd seriously consider letting this into gcc-10. It's going to be well > isolated and it's an iteration of something you posted before the > stage1->stage3 transition. Your choice if you want to try and pull it > together quickly for gcc-10.
Ok great, I will aim to get something together ASAP. Thanks, Jozef > > Jeff >
