>>> On 08.08.13 at 18:01, "H.J. Lu" wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 12:19 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 08.08.13 at 02:33, "H.J. Lu" wrote:
>>> We use the .gnu_attribute directive to record an object attribute:
>>>
>>> enum
>>> {
>>> Tag_GNU_X86_EXTERN_BRANCH = 4,
>>> };
>>>
>>> for the type
I am having trouble meeting the constraints of the scheduler and the
register allocator for my back end. The relevant features are:
1) VLIW - up to 4 instructions can be issued each cycle
2) If a vliw bundle has both a set and a use, the use will use the old
values.
3) A call instruction will p
Hi,
I'm currently trying to create multilib libraries compiled with MPX.
The main difference with existing multilib variants on i386 target is
that new targets (32/mpx, 64/mpx) are compatible with old variants
(32, 64). Also we should not prevent user from using mpx if he does
not have MPX variant
Hi all,
does anyone know how to configure gcc to build with
"__atomic_compare_exchange_n" support for i386 target?
WeiY
Best Regards
在 2013-8-6，下午11:37，Jonathan Wakely 写道：
> On 6 August 2013 16:30, Deng Hengyi wrote:
>> Hi Jonathan,
>>
>> Thank you for your reply.
>> And about the error i enc
On 8/9/2013 10:15 AM, Deng Hengyi wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> does anyone know how to configure gcc to build with
> "__atomic_compare_exchange_n" support for i386 target?
I recall that one issue with *-rtems* targets is that
we support CPU models which are lower than typically
used on Linux and BSD syst
Hi Joel,
I have done a test, it seems that '-march=i386' does not provide
"__atomic_compare_exchange_n" libs. And '-march=i486' or '-march=pentium' can
find the '__atomic_compare_exchange_n' function.
weiy@ubuntu:~/project/gsoc/gsoc2013/rtems-build/arm-build$ i386-rtems4.11-gcc
-m32 -march=i38
On 8/9/2013 11:05 AM, Deng Hengyi wrote:
> Hi Joel,
>
> I have done a test, it seems that '-march=i386' does not provide
> "__atomic_compare_exchange_n" libs. And '-march=i486' or '-march=pentium' can
> find the '__atomic_compare_exchange_n' function.
Look in the source for that methods on x86 an
On 13-08-09 7:25 AM, shmeel gutl wrote:
I am having trouble meeting the constraints of the scheduler and the
register allocator for my back end. The relevant features are:
1) VLIW - up to 4 instructions can be issued each cycle
2) If a vliw bundle has both a set and a use, the use will use the
On Fri, Aug 09, 2013 at 11:23:51AM -0500, Joel Sherrill wrote:
> On 8/9/2013 11:05 AM, Deng Hengyi wrote:
> > Hi Joel,
> >
> > I have done a test, it seems that '-march=i386' does not provide
> > "__atomic_compare_exchange_n" libs. And '-march=i486' or '-march=pentium'
> > can find the '__atomic_
On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 12:08 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 08.08.13 at 18:01, "H.J. Lu" wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 12:19 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 08.08.13 at 02:33, "H.J. Lu" wrote:
We use the .gnu_attribute directive to record an object attribute:
enum
{
On Mon, 2013-08-05 at 11:47 +0100, Tejas Belagod wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm looking for some help understanding how BIT_FIELD_REFs work with
> big-endian.
>
> Vector subscripts in this example:
>
> #define vector __attribute__((vector_size(sizeof(int)*4) ))
>
> typedef int vec vector;
>
> int foo(v
On 9 August 2013 17:59, Joe Buck wrote:
> The i386 architecture lacks atomic compare instructions, to the point
> where libstdc++ can't be built with that architecture (correct and
> efficient atomic operations are vital important for libstdc++, andon i386
> it can't be done).
I think libstdc++ ca
12 matches
Mail list logo
