On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 21:46:48 +0100 Peter Naulls <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi, > In fact, most ARMs don't have FP support (it's emulated) including > StrongARM variants on which Kaffe for ARM would mostly have been run in > the past. Even when they do have genuine FP support, it doesn't change > the generated code, and really there's almost nothing between ARMs that > changes how application code operates. > > There are a number of reasons why a change might be required or seen: > > One is the change in soft versus hard FP support in GCC's output (the > former means GCC tries to avoid actual FP instructions since they are > slow because of emulation), and might have sparked the confusion. > This depends upon the toolchain setup, and is certainly not XScale > specific. > > Changes between GCC 2.95/3.3/3.4 meant the code came out differently > and different numbers of items needed to be saved on the stack. > > Something else. > > In any case, I recommend you find the true cause, and take away any code > that checks for an XScale. to avoid the confusion, we should probably remove the --enable-xscale configure option and have a --with-native-fpu (or whatever) option instead that would default to true on i386 but to false on arm. The different SP_OFFSETs in config/arm/threads.h would then depend on whether an fpu is available and not on whether kaffe is built for an xscale. Does that make more sense? Regards, Helmer _______________________________________________ kaffe mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://kaffe.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kaffe
