On Wed, 1 Jul 2015, Zinovy Nis wrote:
> Had anyone a chance to compare FP implementation in compiler_rt? I
> still wonder why the sizes differ so much, Incomplete implementation
> in compiler_rt?
> compiler_rt claims it is IEEE-compliant.
If you examine the implementation approaches, you will see
On 01/07/15 16:34, Zinovy Nis wrote:
> The only idea on size difference I have is:
>
> headers text in many of FP-emulation files from compiler_rt contains lines
> like:
>
> // This file implements quad-precision soft-float addition ***with the
> IEEE-754 default rounding*** (to nearest, ties to
The only idea on size difference I have is:
headers text in many of FP-emulation files from compiler_rt contains lines like:
// This file implements quad-precision soft-float addition ***with the
IEEE-754 default rounding*** (to nearest, ties to even).
2015-07-01 16:59 GMT+03:00 Zinovy Nis :
>
Had anyone a chance to compare FP implementation in compiler_rt? I
still wonder why the sizes differ so much, Incomplete implementation
in compiler_rt?
compiler_rt claims it is IEEE-compliant.
2015-06-30 23:10 GMT+03:00 Joseph Myers :
> On Tue, 30 Jun 2015, H.J. Lu wrote:
>
>> > soft-fp is expecte
On Tue, 30 Jun 2015, H.J. Lu wrote:
> > soft-fp is expected to be used on 32-bit and 64-bit systems for which a
> > few kB code size is insignificant.
>
> Size is very important for IA MCU. Would it be acceptable to update
> soft-fp to optimize for size with
>
> #ifdef __OPTIMIZE_SIZE__
> #else
On 6/30/2015 1:42 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 10:44 AM, Joseph Myers wrote:
On Tue, 30 Jun 2015, Zinovy Nis wrote:
It works properly but I noticed that code the size for many arithmetic
functions is much more larger than for soft-fp emulation provided by
LLVM's compiler_rt li
On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 10:44 AM, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Jun 2015, Zinovy Nis wrote:
>
>> It works properly but I noticed that code the size for many arithmetic
>> functions is much more larger than for soft-fp emulation provided by
>> LLVM's compiler_rt library.
>
> Code size is discuss
On Tue, 30 Jun 2015, Zinovy Nis wrote:
> It works properly but I noticed that code the size for many arithmetic
> functions is much more larger than for soft-fp emulation provided by
> LLVM's compiler_rt library.
Code size is discussed in the paper about soft-fp in the 2006 Summit
proceedings.
On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 4:33 AM, Zinovy Nis wrote:
> Hi.
>
>
> I'm building libgcc for a "iamcu" target (Pentium-like but with
> soft-fp emulation, the only x86 with SoftFP I know) with
> --enable-target-optspace.
Support for i?86*-*-elfiamcu target has been checked in as of
revision 225199.
>
