On 26/11/13 09:18, Eric Botcazou wrote: >> you are correct - this was an incorrect change. I believe that the >> patch below would be correct, but it is impossible to test it because (i >> believe) that gcc no longer works if the host_bits_per_wide_int is 32. >> I could be wrong about this but if i am correct, what do you want me to do? > > While you're right that most mainstream architectures now require a 64-bit > HWI, not all of them do according to config.gcc, so I don't think that this > path is entirely dead yet. I'll carry out the testing once we agree on the > final change.
I'm hoping, once this patch series is in that we might be able to migrate the ARM port back to supporting a 32-bit HWI. The driving factor behind the original switch was supporting 128-bit constants for Neon and these patches should resolve that. R.