Thanks for the updates. If we care about cross-target consistency then I think we must continue supporting all of the possible values of -mfloat-abi for ARM.
Just thought: what does -mfpu=<fp arch> (i.e. without the 'softvfp+' part) mean now? It could mean 'calling convention unspecified' or it could mean 'hardfloat'. I think it should mean the latter, to be consistent with the armcc/gcc usage, but I _think_ that means changing the default calling convention? I don't like changing defaults - does the community (or you) have any position on this? Regards, Bernie > -----Original Message----- > From: Renato Golin [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: 18 February 2014 11:56 > To: Bernard Ogden > Cc: Clang Commits > Subject: Re: [PATCH] Implements -mfpu=softvfp+variants on ARM driver > > On 18 February 2014 10:53, Bernie Ogden <[email protected]> wrote: > > Nitpick: line 724 of Tools.cpp is blank. > > Done. > > > > You're testing that we're setting the right target features for FP > hardware, > > but I don't see tests that we're getting the right calling > convention. Is > > that something that could reasonably be added, or am I just showing > my > > ignorance here? > > No, I completely forgot. Thanks! ;) > > > > Is float-abi an exclusively ARM thing? > > I don't think so, though it probably more important in ARM than other > archs. > > > > And do we care about cross-target CLI consistency? > > We do, unfortunately. It's a lot easier to cross-compile using the > same build system. > > > > Basically LGTM, modulo the nitpick and the tests. > > Thanks! > > --renato _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
