Seeing how long the thread on gcc-patches on what comments
-Wimplicit-fallthrough should recognize has gotten, I thought it might
be a good idea to start a discussion on lint-style comments more
generally. Instead of just limiting the use of lint-style comments to
-Wimplicit-fallthrough, why not sp
Hi,
I'd like to ask what should be the calling convention/ABI for these
routines on platforms with hardware floating point support (but
somehow still want to generate a libcall for whatever reasons).
In particular, it seems that on all the platforms with a
arm*-*-gnueabihf triple I've checked (al
On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 5:23 PM, Yichao Yu wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'd like to ask what should be the calling convention/ABI for these
> routines on platforms with hardware floating point support (but
> somehow still want to generate a libcall for whatever reasons).
>
> In particular, it seems that on al
On Wed, 28 Sep 2016, Yichao Yu wrote:
> In particular, it seems that on all the platforms with a
> arm*-*-gnueabihf triple I've checked (alarm armv7h, alarm armv6h,
> debian armhf, fedora armv7hl) the __powidf2 function (and possibly
> many others) are compiled with the AAPCS VFP calling conventio
On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 7:39 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Sep 2016, Yichao Yu wrote:
>
>> In particular, it seems that on all the platforms with a
>> arm*-*-gnueabihf triple I've checked (alarm armv7h, alarm armv6h,
>> debian armhf, fedora armv7hl) the __powidf2 function (and possibly
>> m
On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 7:45 PM, Yichao Yu wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 7:39 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
>> On Wed, 28 Sep 2016, Yichao Yu wrote:
>>
>>> In particular, it seems that on all the platforms with a
>>> arm*-*-gnueabihf triple I've checked (alarm armv7h, alarm armv6h,
>>> debian armhf,
On Wed, 28 Sep 2016, Yichao Yu wrote:
> >> Except where an external ABI defines things like that, the normal
> >> expectation for libgcc functions is that they have the same ABI as for an
> >> ordinary C function with the same prototype. That is, since libgcc.texi
> >> gives a prototype for __pow
On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 8:07 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Sep 2016, Yichao Yu wrote:
>
>> >> Except where an external ABI defines things like that, the normal
>> >> expectation for libgcc functions is that they have the same ABI as for an
>> >> ordinary C function with the same prototype.
