Hi Oleg, On Wed, 17 Oct 2012, Oleg Endo wrote: >> + <li>Added support for the built-in functions >> + <code>__builtin_thread_pointer</code> and >> + <code>__builtin_set_thread_pointer</code>. This assumes that >> + <code>GBR</code> is used to hold the thread pointer of the current >> thread, >> + which has been the case since a while already. >> >> "since a while" -> "for a while", and I made that change. >> That said, why is this important, and is there a fixed date or version? > It might be important for some embedded systems software that does not > use the GBR for storing the thread pointer, but for something else (like > a pointer to some global table of frequently used stuff or something > like that). I just thought it might be better to mention this. But > you're right, the last "for a while" part sounds strange, and should > probably just be removed, reducing it to "This assumes that > <code>GBR</code> is used to hold the thread pointer of the current > thread."
That sounds good. I noticed this has not been changed yet, so I assume you were probably waiting for my response? Will you be making this change? >> + Memory loads and stores >> + relative to the address returned by >> <code>__builtin_thread_pointer</code> >> + will now also utilize <code>GBR</code> based displacement address modes. >> >> Why do these _now_ utilize these address modes, when per the above >> __builtin_thread_pointer was just added? This last sentence implies >> a change when there does not seem to be one? > Because before GCC did not utilize GBR addressing modes on SH at all. > Now it can do that, if the base address is obtained via > __builtin_thread_pointer. Does that make sense? :) Yep, it does. :-) Thanks for the explanation. Gerald
