On 12/11/25 09:32, Xi Ruoyao wrote:
On Wed, 2025-12-10 at 19:21 +0800, WANG Xuerui wrote:
On 11/27/25 17:22, mengqinggang wrote:
[snip]
diff --git a/gcc/config/loongarch/loongarch-c.cc
b/gcc/config/loongarch/loongarch-c.cc
index fc031a6fe90..6e2f8f43818 100644
--- a/gcc/config/loongarch/loongarch-c.cc
+++ b/gcc/config/loongarch/loongarch-c.cc
@@ -55,6 +55,11 @@ loongarch_define_unconditional_macros (cpp_reader *pfile)
builtin_define ("__loongarch_grlen=64");
builtin_define ("__loongarch64");
}
+ else
+ builtin_define ("__loongarch_grlen=32");
+
+ if (TARGET_ABI_ILP32)
+ builtin_define ("__loongarch_ilp32");
if (TARGET_ABI_LP64)
{
It would be great to indicate LA32R with a builtin macro too, something
like "__loongarch_la32r" sounds great to me. I'm okay with spelling
"reduced" fully out too.
IMO we should add something like "__loongarch_32s" and use
!defined(__loongarch_32s) for 32r then. For all yet supported ISA
subsets (LSX, LASX, etc.) we always use the positive form to indicate
the subset is available, not the negative form.
That sounds better, thanks!
--
Regards,
WANG "xen0n" Xuerui
Linux/LoongArch mailing list: https://lore.kernel.org/loongarch/
Unofficial Loongson OSS community: https://github.com/loongson-community
