================
Comment at: lib/Basic/Targets.cpp:5729
@@ +5728,3 @@
+ .Case("mips5", true)
+ .Case("mips32", true)
+ .Case("mips64", true)
----------------
dsanders wrote:
> petarj wrote:
> > According to the documentation, Has2008 field in FIR Register is optional
> > as of R3. So, if I understand this correctly, mips32r2 always uses legacy
> > encoding. Is that correct? If so, should we add mips32r2 case as well?
> That's my understanding. Although it's worth pointing out that we also accept
> microMIPS in mips32r2 at the moment even though it was added in mips32r3 as
> far as I know.
>
> For -mnan, I think we should add mips32r2 to the legacy-only list and explain
> the reason to anyone who asks about it.
I think it is better to explicitly express 2008/legacy support status for each
CPU. Let's consider the following code:
```
enum NanMode { NanLegacy = 1, Nan2008 = 2 };
NanMode getSupportedNanMode() {
return llvm::StringSwitch<int>(CPU)
.Case("mips1", NanLegacy)
....
.Case("mips32r2", NanLegacy | Nan2008)
...
.Case("mips32r6", Nan2008)
}
...
IsNan2008 = getSupportedNanMode() == Nan2008;
...
else if (*it == "+nan2008") {
if (getSupportedNanMode() & Nan2008)
IsNan2008 = true;
else
Diags.Report(diag::warn_target_unsupported_nan2008) << CPU;
}
```
================
Comment at: lib/Basic/Targets.cpp:5964
@@ +5963,3 @@
+ if (hasOnlyNaNLegacyEncoding()) {
+ unsigned DiagID = Diags.getCustomDiagID(DiagnosticsEngine::Warning,
+ "the '%0' architecture does not support '-mnan=2008'");
----------------
Why do we write a warning message right here instead to put it to the
DiagnosticXXX.td file?
http://reviews.llvm.org/D8170
EMAIL PREFERENCES
http://reviews.llvm.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
