1.) decides rather or not to inline a function,
2.) decides rather or not to make a .constprop version of a function,
3.) a good pass (when all constant propagation is done) to search for
fn parameters and variables (marked with an attribute) that were not
constproped away, and finally
4.) wha
On Sat, 29 Apr 2017, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> We also still have to agree on the target triples for the new port.
> If you have any thoughts on this, I'd love to hear them.
It seems fairly obvious that the powerpc-*-eabispe* and
powerpc*-*-linux*spe* triples should continue to work while bein
On Mon, May 01, 2017 at 10:48:05AM +, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Apr 2017, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
>
> > We also still have to agree on the target triples for the new port.
> > If you have any thoughts on this, I'd love to hear them.
>
> It seems fairly obvious that the powerpc-*-eabi
On Mon, 1 May 2017, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> My current patches have powerpc*-*-*spe* for the powerpcspe port.
> Maybe it should also allow powerpcspe-*-*? If people are willing
> to change the target triple they use.
In that case, either config.sub or config.gcc could handle the mapping.
>
On Mon, May 01, 2017 at 11:30:59AM +, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Mon, 1 May 2017, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
>
> > My current patches have powerpc*-*-*spe* for the powerpcspe port.
> > Maybe it should also allow powerpcspe-*-*? If people are willing
> > to change the target triple they use.
>
>
Hi,
is the gcc-prs mailing list active? The archives show no
bugs entered for example for https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-prs/2017-04/ .
Regards
Thomas
On Mai 01 2017, Thomas Koenig wrote:
> is the gcc-prs mailing list active?
Not any more since GCC has started using bugzilla back in 2003.
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, sch...@linux-m68k.org
GPG Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
"And now for something complete
On 5/1/2017 5:48 AM, Joseph Myers wrote:
On Sat, 29 Apr 2017, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
We also still have to agree on the target triples for the new port.
If you have any thoughts on this, I'd love to hear them.
It seems fairly obvious that the powerpc-*-eabispe* and
powerpc*-*-linux*spe*
On 5/1/2017 10:47 AM, Joel Sherrill wrote:
On 5/1/2017 5:48 AM, Joseph Myers wrote:
On Sat, 29 Apr 2017, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
We also still have to agree on the target triples for the new port.
If you have any thoughts on this, I'd love to hear them.
It seems fairly obvious that the
OK.
On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 2:02 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
> Hi again,
>
> On 26/04/2017 12:32, Paolo Carlini wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> in 2013 (2013-09-16) Adam added two slightly obscure functions and I can't
>> find much around in terms of rationale, etc:
>>
>> /* Returns true iff TYPE is a TEMPLA
On Mon, May 01, 2017 at 10:55:53AM -0500, Joel Sherrill wrote:
> >powerpc-*-rtemsspe* would be OK.
> >
> >powerpc-*-eabisimspe* is pretty ugly though.
>
>
> After I sent this, I saw in another response that powerpcspe*-*-*
> was proposed. Is that clearer?
Yes, it does not have part of the archit
FWIW, at AdaCore we're using e500v2-wrs-vxworks for our VxWorks
toolchain for SPE.
Arno
On Mon, May 01, 2017 at 06:12:37PM +0200, Arnaud Charlet wrote:
> FWIW, at AdaCore we're using e500v2-wrs-vxworks for our VxWorks
> toolchain for SPE.
config.sub translates that to powerpc-wrs-vxworksspe so that works.
Segher
13 matches
Mail list logo
