On 07/05/2011 02:13 PM, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
Hallo!
On Tue, 05 Jul 2011 13:52:08 +0200, Rainer Orth
wrote:
Like this? [...]
Instead of nested cases, I'd rather use one i[34567]86-*-linux* case and
another for the rest, duplicating extra_parts and tmake_file. Same for
x86_64-*-linux* vs.
Hallo!
On Tue, 05 Jul 2011 13:52:08 +0200, Rainer Orth
wrote:
> > Like this? [...]
>
> Instead of nested cases, I'd rather use one i[34567]86-*-linux* case and
> another for the rest, duplicating extra_parts and tmake_file. Same for
> x86_64-*-linux* vs. the rest.
>
> But that's just me.
My
On 07/05/2011 01:52 PM, Rainer Orth wrote:
Instead of nested cases, I'd rather use one i[34567]86-*-linux* case and
another for the rest, duplicating extra_parts and tmake_file. Same for
x86_64-*-linux* vs. the rest.
But that's just me.
I agree.
Paolo
Hi Thomas,
> Like this?
>
>
> libgcc/
> config.host: Use i386/linux-unwind.h only for *-*-linux*.
>
> ---
> libgcc/config.host | 10 --
> 1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/libgcc/config.host b/libgcc/config.host
> index 326ce91..1d5b887 100644
Hallo!
On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 10:40:10 +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 06/21/2011 12:04 PM, Rainer Orth wrote:
> > For md_unwind_header on the other hand, you'd have almost as many cases
> > as in the general case. I fear it's hard to have the configuration
> > split over too many places. So I'd
On 06/21/2011 12:04 PM, Rainer Orth wrote:
For md_unwind_header on the other hand, you'd have almost as many cases
as in the general case. I fear it's hard to have the configuration
split over too many places. So I'd suggest to split the affected cases
into Linux and non-Linux ones, with the sl
Hi Thomas,
> (Sorry for being late with this -- I'm listed as a GNU/Hurd OS Port
> Maintainer, but I have not been CCed in the original patch email, and I'm
> only able to read gcc-patches/the Git log at irregular times.)
sorry for not including you in the Cc: I must have simply overlooked it
and
Hallo!
(Sorry for being late with this -- I'm listed as a GNU/Hurd OS Port
Maintainer, but I have not been CCed in the original patch email, and I'm
only able to read gcc-patches/the Git log at irregular times.)
On Fri, 03 Jun 2011 16:35:21 +0200, Rainer Orth
wrote:
> gcc:
> [...]
>
On Jun 3, 2011, at 7:35 AM, Rainer Orth wrote:
> Apart from those changes, the patch addresses the PowerPC Darwin and
> Windows32 issues as suggested:
Darwin bits: Ok.
Ok, windows part of the patch is ok.
Thanks,
Kai
On 06/03/2011 04:35 PM, Rainer Orth wrote:
Apart from those changes, the patch addresses the PowerPC Darwin and
Windows32 issues as suggested:
* rs6000/darwin-unwind.h is wrapped in !__LP64__, while removing the
need for the !DARWIN_LIBSYSTEM_HAS_UNWIND test (only defined on Darwin
9 and u
Paolo Bonzini writes:
> On 05/30/2011 05:43 PM, Rainer Orth wrote:
>> +md-unwind-support.h: config.status
>> +if test -n "$(md_unwind_header)"; then \
>> + echo "#include \"config/$(md_unwind_header)\""> $@; \
>> +else \
>> + :> $@; \
>> +fi
>
> Can you add a default file
On 1 Jun 2011, at 20:40, Mike Stump wrote:
On Jun 1, 2011, at 10:51 AM, Rainer Orth wrote:
I can certainly do it this way for now, but if we could do away
with the
tests completely, that would be cleaner.
Agreed, though, I don't believe the test is superfluous.
You still haven't answered
On Jun 1, 2011, at 10:51 AM, Rainer Orth wrote:
>>> I can certainly do it this way for now, but if we could do away with the
>>> tests completely, that would be cleaner.
>>
>> Agreed, though, I don't believe the test is superfluous.
>
> You still haven't answered my question wrt. Darwin 8 vs. 64-
Mike Stump writes:
> On Jun 1, 2011, at 9:01 AM, Rainer Orth wrote:
>> Both TARGET_64BIT_DEFAULT and TARGET_BI_ARCH live in gcc only, so at
>> least in the medium term, we need different tests here.
>
> Ah, ick. Oh well... The next more general rule would be something like: one
> can set a fea
2011/6/1 Richard Henderson :
> On 06/01/2011 09:01 AM, Rainer Orth wrote:
>> The problem with this approach is that some of the macros tested only
>> live in gcc, not libgcc once the libgcc sources no longer include tm.h
>> etc. E.g. look at i386/mingw32.h:
>>
>> #if !TARGET_64BIT_DEFAULT && !defi
On 06/01/2011 09:01 AM, Rainer Orth wrote:
> The problem with this approach is that some of the macros tested only
> live in gcc, not libgcc once the libgcc sources no longer include tm.h
> etc. E.g. look at i386/mingw32.h:
>
> #if !TARGET_64BIT_DEFAULT && !defined (TARGET_BI_ARCH)
> #define MD_U
On Jun 1, 2011, at 9:01 AM, Rainer Orth wrote:
> Both TARGET_64BIT_DEFAULT and TARGET_BI_ARCH live in gcc only, so at
> least in the medium term, we need different tests here.
Ah, ick. Oh well... The next more general rule would be something like: one
can set a feature (implicit -D__GCC_DO_UNWI
Mike Stump writes:
> On May 30, 2011, at 8:43 AM, Rainer Orth wrote:
>> * The three users of MD_UNWIND_SUPPORT are modified to unconditionally
>> include a new md-unwind-support.h header which is created from the
>> info in config.host: if md_unwind_header exists, it is included in
>> md-unwin
On May 30, 2011, at 8:43 AM, Rainer Orth wrote:
> * The three users of MD_UNWIND_SUPPORT are modified to unconditionally
> include a new md-unwind-support.h header which is created from the
> info in config.host: if md_unwind_header exists, it is included in
> md-unwind-support.h, otherwise the
Paolo Bonzini writes:
> On 05/30/2011 05:43 PM, Rainer Orth wrote:
>> +md-unwind-support.h: config.status
>> +if test -n "$(md_unwind_header)"; then \
>> + echo "#include \"config/$(md_unwind_header)\""> $@; \
>> +else \
>> + :> $@; \
>> +fi
>
> Can you add a default file
Kai Tietz writes:
>>> mingw part is not ok, as it breaks 32-bit defaulted multilib version
>>> compiler.
>>
>> Can you explain what is going on here? Could it be fixed by wrapping
>> w32-unwind.h in a #ifdef __x86_64__?
>
> To wrap it into __x86_64__ won't help. The issue is that in
> combinatio
Paolo Bonzini writes:
> Rainer, the same solution that is found for Windows should be used for
> darwin, too.
I'm uncertain if anything is needed for Darwin, though:
gcc/config/rs6000/darwin.h has
#if !defined(__LP64__) && !defined(DARWIN_LIBSYSTEM_HAS_UNWIND)
#define MD_UNWIND_SUPPORT "config/
On 05/31/2011 11:30 AM, Kai Tietz wrote:
The issue is that in
combination of 32-bit and 64-bit we need to default here to SjLj,
Ok, then what you're testing is actually whether you're using sjlj or
dw2 unwinding. config/i386/cygming.h will ensure that this is the same
as testing TARGET_BI_AR
2011/5/31 Paolo Bonzini :
> On 05/30/2011 07:54 PM, Kai Tietz wrote:
>>
>> > -/* For 64-bit Windows we can't use DW2 unwind info. Also for multilib
>> > - builds we can't use it, too. */
>> > -#if !TARGET_64BIT_DEFAULT&& !defined (TARGET_BI_ARCH)
>> > -#define MD_UNWIND_SUPPORT "config/i386/w32
On 05/30/2011 05:43 PM, Rainer Orth wrote:
+md-unwind-support.h: config.status
+ if test -n "$(md_unwind_header)"; then \
+ echo "#include \"config/$(md_unwind_header)\""> $@; \
+ else \
+ :> $@; \
+ fi
Can you add a default file md-unwind-none.h and use
AC_
On 05/30/2011 07:54 PM, Kai Tietz wrote:
> -/* For 64-bit Windows we can't use DW2 unwind info. Also for multilib
> - builds we can't use it, too. */
> -#if !TARGET_64BIT_DEFAULT&& !defined (TARGET_BI_ARCH)
> -#define MD_UNWIND_SUPPORT "config/i386/w32-unwind.h"
> -#endif
> -
> /* This matc
, "Kai Tietz"
, "Dave Korn" , "Mike Stump"
Sent: Monday, May 30, 2011 5:43:22 PM
Subject: [build] Move MD_UNWIND_SUPPORT to toplevel libgcc
Once the initial Solaris 2 toplevel libgcc move
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-05/msg00098.html
is complet
Once the initial Solaris 2 toplevel libgcc move
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-05/msg00098.html
is complete, there are only two macros left that could be moved for my
targets: MD_UNWIND_SUPPORT (handled in this patch) and
ENABLE_EXECUTE_STACK (in a followup).
The following patch
29 matches
Mail list logo
