Re: [PATCH V2] RISC-V: Add the missed half floating-point mode patterns of local_pic_load/store when only use zfhmin or zhinxmin

[Lehua Ding]

Committed, thanks Robin and Palmer.




------------------ Original ------------------
From:                                                                           
                                             "Palmer Dabbelt"                   
                                                                 
<pal...@rivosinc.com&gt;;
Date:&nbsp;Fri, Aug 18, 2023 01:51 AM
To:&nbsp;"rdapp.gcc"<rdapp....@gmail.com&gt;;
Cc:&nbsp;"lehua.ding"<lehua.d...@rivai.ai&gt;;"gcc-patches"<gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org&gt;;"rdapp.gcc"<rdapp....@gmail.com&gt;;"juzhe.zhong"<juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai&gt;;"Kito
 Cheng"<kito.ch...@gmail.com&gt;;"jeffreyalaw"<jeffreya...@gmail.com&gt;;
Subject:&nbsp;Re: [PATCH V2] RISC-V: Add the missed half floating-point mode 
patterns of local_pic_load/store when only use zfhmin or zhinxmin



On Thu, 17 Aug 2023 10:03:04 PDT (-0700), rdapp....@gmail.com wrote:
&gt; Indeed all ANYLSF patterns have TARGET_HARD_FLOAT (==f extension) which
&gt; is incompatible with ZHINX or ZHINXMIN anyway.&nbsp; That should really be 
fixed
&gt; separately or at least clarified, maybe I'm missing something.

We've also got the broader issue where these PIC patterns are likely not 
the way to go long term, they're just papering around some other issues 
(and are likely why we flip the implicit-relocs behavior implicitly).&nbsp; 
We should probably fix that at some point, but I don't see any reason to 
block a fix on a cleanup.

That said, given that folks are poking around in here it's probably 
worth putting together test cases for the other patterns in there.

&gt; Still we can go forward with the patch itself as it improves things
&gt; independently, so LGTM.

Ya, IMO it's fine to add these given they fix the issue.

&gt; Regards
&gt;&nbsp; Robin