Hi Christian,
On 18/05/15 09:41, Christian Bruel wrote:
On 05/06/2015 04:29 PM, Christian Bruel wrote:
>Implement the -mflip-thump option. Undocumented for internal testing
>only. This option artificially inserts alternative attribute thumb/modes
>on functions.
>
>This close the patch set. Tha
On 08/06/15 09:45, Christian Bruel wrote:
Hi Ramana,
Ok, I see.
The patch looks ok to me modulo the typo nits I pointed out, but I
think Ramana
should have the final say here as he's already started reviewing it
and it adds quite
a lot of functionality.
Thanks,
Kyrill
do you have other f
On 01/06/15 12:29, Christian Bruel wrote:
hi Kyrill
On 06/01/2015 12:39 PM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
On 18/05/15 09:14, Christian Bruel wrote:
Hi,
Hi Christian,
A couple comments inline.
Overall, the approach looks ok to me, though I think we'll have to
generalise arm_valid_target_attribute_re
Hi Christian,
On 18/05/15 11:45, Christian Bruel wrote:
+ additional chunks needed to redefine the macros for #pragma GCC target
Applies on top of [5/6]
thanks,
Christian
p5.2.patch
2014-09-23 Christian Bruel
* config/arm/arm-c.c (arm_cpu_cpp_builtins): Conditionally define
Hi Christian,
On 18/05/15 09:26, Christian Bruel wrote:
On 05/08/2015 11:18 AM, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
>
>
>On 06/05/15 15:27, Christian Bruel wrote:
>>Implements the hooks for #pragma GCC target
>>
>>A test included to check that macros were correctly defined/undefined on
>>pragma region
On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 11:31 AM, Christian Bruel wrote:
> Hi Ramana,
>
> You've already approved [3/6]
> (https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-05/msg00524.html)
Yes I know, but all patches that get committed need to be archived on
the lists according to policy. So, can you please send the patc
On 18/05/15 09:14, Christian Bruel wrote:
Hi,
Hi Christian,
A couple comments inline.
Overall, the approach looks ok to me, though I think we'll have to
generalise arm_valid_target_attribute_rec in the future if we want
to allow other target attributes.
Thanks,
Kyrill
Here is again a new v
2015-05-11 9:49 GMT+01:00 Christian Bruel :
> -BEGIN PGP MESSAGE-
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
>
> hQIOA7kay12Fw5I3EAf/dJLl6z88mNVga3f+gsF8SKunpHWh+OsNTdg0zovUsPH/
> YX1l86qL92we5htdf86j8rKTOH9PdOQCITsAnwKecWgpas5cGV4s2LHcbX/wQyl4
> UGnVaQhDrGZputPDjJkaysrX+aI/Tv0JWBm7XZE5pyTRN6ngm/
On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 9:49 AM, Christian Bruel wrote:
> 2 parts for maintainers
>
> - c-family: machine descriptions export macro definitions into c
> implementation : need to export 'builtin_define_with_int_value' and '
> builtin_define_type_sizeof'
>
>Could a global reviewer check this ?
On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 2:42 PM, Christian Bruel wrote:
>
>
> On 05/26/2015 12:11 PM, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 13/05/15 11:16, Christian Bruel wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> > - [2.2/6]: Redefine TARGET_MACROS for #pragma GCC target without
>>> "thumbness" the glue.
>>>
>>> Here it is,
On 13/05/15 11:16, Christian Bruel wrote:
> - [2.2/6]: Redefine TARGET_MACROS for #pragma GCC target without
"thumbness" the glue.
Here it is, no regression for
arm-sim/
arm-sim//-march=armv7-a
arm-sim//-mthumb
arm-sim//-mthumb/-march=armv7-a
Obviously, [4/6],[5/6] an
On 13/05/15 09:49, Christian Bruel wrote:
2 parts for maintainers
- c-family: machine descriptions export macro definitions into c
implementation : need to export 'builtin_define_with_int_value' and '
builtin_define_type_sizeof'
+1 on this. It would help me a lot in implementing
target
On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 10:13 AM, Christian Bruel
wrote:
>>
>>
>> OK with those changes.
>>
>>
>>
>> Ramana
>>
>
> thanks, done
>
> following up the thumb_code cleanup, here is a missing chunk for the vxworks
> config.
>
> arm-vxworks build checked. ok for trunk ?
>
> thanks,
>
> Christian
OK th
OK with those changes.
Ramana
thanks, done
following up the thumb_code cleanup, here is a missing chunk for the
vxworks config.
arm-vxworks build checked. ok for trunk ?
thanks,
Christian
2015-05-11 Christian Bruel
* config/arm/arm-protos.h (thumb_code, thumb1_code): Remove.
binunvnEzkM1k.bin
Description: PGP/MIME version identification
encrypted.asc
Description: OpenPGP encrypted message
On 06/05/15 15:27, Christian Bruel wrote:
Implements the hooks for #pragma GCC target
A test included to check that macros were correctly defined/undefined on
pragma regions.
Thanks
Christian
Missing the hooks - this only appears to have the test.
Ramana
I'm still playing with the code, so this is a partial review.
We should prevent inlining of ARM state functions into functions we know
will be T16 if !TARGET_SOFT_FLOAT on the grounds that the architecture
doesn't have floating point instruction encodings in the T16 ISA
(Thumb1). We'll just c
On 05/07/2015 10:49 AM, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
>
>
> On 06/05/15 15:20, Christian Bruel wrote:
>> In preparation of the pragma target
>>
>> reorganize ÂTARGET_CPU_CPP_BUILTINSÂ to redefine mode dependent macros
>> based on current thumb_p.
>
> I'm not entirely happy with this patch as it
On 06/05/15 15:22, Christian Bruel wrote:
Re-implement ARM_DECLARE_FUNCTION_NAME as a function. That will make
changed related to unified/divided and mode directives easier to insert.
Patch could be smaller as below.
Thanks
Christian
2014-09-23 Christian Bruel
* config/arm/ar
On 06/05/15 15:20, Christian Bruel wrote:
In preparation of the pragma target
reorganize ÂTARGET_CPU_CPP_BUILTINSÂ to redefine mode dependent macros
based on current thumb_p.
I'm not entirely happy with this patch as it appears to be too tied to
just the "thumbness" of the attributes. Addit
2014-09-23 Christian Bruel
* config/arm/arm.h (arm_option_override): Reoganized and split.
Reorganized and split into
(arm_option_params_internal); New function.
s/;/: " New function."
(arm_option_check_internal): New function.
(arm_option_overr
+ Sandra's doc review fixes.
tested with make doc pdf
thanks
Christian
On 05/06/2015 04:24 PM, Christian Bruel wrote:
> Implements and document the hooks to support target_attributes.
>
> The emission of blx is handled directly for armv5 to overcome a bug with
> the current binutils that fails
On 05/06/2015 08:24 AM, Christian Bruel wrote:
diff '--exclude=.svn' -ruN gnu_trunk.p3/gcc/gcc/doc/extend.texi
gnu_trunk.p4/gcc/gcc/doc/extend.texi
--- gnu_trunk.p3/gcc/gcc/doc/extend.texi2015-05-06 09:00:31.232943164
+0200
+++ gnu_trunk.p4/gcc/gcc/doc/extend.texi2015-05-06 14:5
Hello Ramana,
I don't know if you have started to look at it, but the attribute
support fails after upgrading.
This patch aims to catch up on the changes around the fipa_ra
-masm-syntax-unified options since the initial posting. They were not
tested/supported with the attribute, and of cours
Hi Ramana,
On 11/27/2014 11:36 AM, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 2:54 PM, Christian Bruel wrote:
On 11/19/2014 03:18 PM, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 1:24 PM, Christian Bruel
wrote:
I think I missed the stage3, Anyway would it be OK for stage
On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 2:54 PM, Christian Bruel wrote:
>
>
> On 11/19/2014 03:18 PM, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 1:24 PM, Christian Bruel
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I think I missed the stage3, Anyway would it be OK for stage1 when it
>>> reopens ?
>>
>>
>> Since you submitte
On 11/19/2014 03:18 PM, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 1:24 PM, Christian Bruel wrote:
I think I missed the stage3, Anyway would it be OK for stage1 when it
reopens ?
Since you submitted this well during stage1 and given that these
patches address comments from earlier
On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 1:24 PM, Christian Bruel wrote:
> I think I missed the stage3, Anyway would it be OK for stage1 when it
> reopens ?
Since you submitted this well during stage1 and given that these
patches address comments from earlier in the review process we should
aim to get these in f
On 10/10/14 15:18, Christian Bruel wrote:
>
> On 10/09/2014 04:11 PM, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
>> On 09/10/14 12:35, Christian Bruel wrote:
>>> On 10/08/2014 06:56 PM, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
Hi Christian,
>>> << snipped agreed stuf >>
3) about inlining
I dislike inlining diff
On 10/09/2014 04:11 PM, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> On 09/10/14 12:35, Christian Bruel wrote:
>> On 10/08/2014 06:56 PM, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
>>> Hi Christian,
>> << snipped agreed stuf >>
>>> 3) about inlining
>>>I dislike inlining different modes, From a conceptual use, a user
>>> might
On 09/10/14 12:35, Christian Bruel wrote:
>
> On 10/08/2014 06:56 PM, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
>> Hi Christian,
>
> << snipped agreed stuf >>
>> 3) about inlining
>>I dislike inlining different modes, From a conceptual use, a user
>> might want to switch mode only when changing a function'
On 10/08/2014 06:56 PM, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
> Hi Christian,
<< snipped agreed stuf >>
> 3) about inlining
>I dislike inlining different modes, From a conceptual use, a user
> might want to switch mode only when changing a function's hotness.
> Usually inlining a cold function into a h
Hi Christian,
On 08/10/14 15:38, Christian Bruel wrote:
Hi Ramana,
Thanks for your feedback. Just a few comments while you continue the review
Sure - all thoughts are welcome, this isn't a trivial project and I'm
dredging tertiary storage in my brain and old notes for context on all
the go
Hi Ramana,
Thanks for your feedback. Just a few comments while you continue the review
1) about the documentation in extend.texi, it was in the patch already
: did I miss a part ?
* doc/extend.texi (arm, thumb): Document target attributes.
* doc/invoke.texi (arm, thumb): Mention targ
Hi Christian,
Thanks for looking at this. I will need to read the code in detail but
this is a first top level reivew.
On 09/29/14 12:03, Christian Bruel wrote:
Hi Ramana, Richard,
This patch implements the attribute target (and pragma) to allow
function based interworking.
as in the updat
35 matches
Mail list logo
