[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D41702: Add SysV Abi for PPC64le

2018-01-06 Thread Hal Finkel via Phabricator via lldb-commits 
hfinkel added a comment.

In https://reviews.llvm.org/D41702#969179, @labath wrote:

> Is the only difference between ppc64 and ppc64le ABIs in the endianness of 
> the values?
>  If so, could we make one unified ABI which takes the endianness as an 
> argument (in the constructor, or as a template argument, or deduces it from 
> target endiannes, ...) ?


The ABIs have some other differences. The largest difference between the ABIs 
is how indirect-calls (and, thus, function pointers) work. There are some other 
more-minor differences, for example, some of the call-frame offsets are 
different.  It still might be possible to unify the support (we certainly have 
one backend in LLVM for both), but it's a bit more involved than just switching 
the endianness.


https://reviews.llvm.org/D41702



___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D36804: Add initial support to PowerPC64 little endian (POWER8)

2017-08-22 Thread Hal Finkel via Phabricator via lldb-commits 
hfinkel added inline comments.



Comment at: source/Core/ArchSpec.cpp:375
  SUBTYPE_MASK},
+{ArchSpec::eCore_ppc64le_generic, llvm::MachO::CPU_TYPE_POWERPC64, CPU_ANY,
+ UINT32_MAX, SUBTYPE_MASK},

I doubt this is needed. There's no Darwin support to speak of.


https://reviews.llvm.org/D36804



___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D36804: Add initial support to PowerPC64 little endian (POWER8)

2017-08-22 Thread Hal Finkel via Phabricator via lldb-commits 
hfinkel accepted this revision.
hfinkel added inline comments.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.



Comment at: source/Core/ArchSpec.cpp:375
  SUBTYPE_MASK},
+{ArchSpec::eCore_ppc64le_generic, llvm::MachO::CPU_TYPE_POWERPC64, CPU_ANY,
+ UINT32_MAX, SUBTYPE_MASK},

gut wrote:
> hfinkel wrote:
> > I doubt this is needed. There's no Darwin support to speak of.
> Oh, I see. The MachO object type is only used by MacOS, right? Then I can 
> remove, you are right.
I'm pretty sure that's correct.

Otherwise, this LGTM.



https://reviews.llvm.org/D36804



___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits