On Sun, 2012-04-22 at 08:57 +0200, Jonas Bonn wrote: 
> On Sat, 2012-04-21 at 21:42 +0100, Jeremy Bennett wrote:
> > On Sat, 2012-04-21 at 17:28 +0100, Julius Baxter wrote:
> > > Class I should remain mandatory to implement.
> > > 
> > > A new classification is proposed:
> > > * Class II - Optional Maths: l.div*, l.mul*
> > > * Class III - Optional Bit Manipulation: l.ext[bwh]*, l.ff1, l.fl1,
> > > l.ror, l.rori
> > > * Class IV - MAC Instructions - l.mac*, l.msb
> > > * Class V - Remaining Optional Instructions: l.cmov, l.csync, l.msync,
> > > l.psync, l.cust1-8, l.trap
> > 
> > Hi Julius,
> > 
> > It's a logical structure, except l.trap must be in class I for GDB.
> 
> I tend to agree.  Does this have a high cost (in terms of complexity or
> otherwise) that mandates class V?
> 
> > 
> > But it is a MULTILIB nightmare. Not something we have ever really sorted
> > out properly for OpenRISC, but we will have to. With 5 classes, as a
> > baseline there will be 5 versions of each plain library and 5 versions
> > of each debug library. There is no point having a separate class if you
> > can't compile for it.
> 
> It's not that bad.  Class III isn't something the compiler will be
> emitting, nor class V.

Hi Jonas,

A good compiler should be able to take advantage of these.

> I would say class IV should imply class II; i.e. you can't have class IV
> without class II.
> 
> So that leaves 3 multilib variants: class I only, class I+II, and class
> I+II+IV.

I also came to the conclusion that you end up with 3 base sets, although
I include III in the last set.

> > Then you'll want the versions with and without the FPU. Now you have 20
> > versions of the libraries.
> 
> Touche... my 3 variants is now 6.

And the debugging versions and the profiling versions. So that makes 6 x
2 x 2 = 24 variants.


Jeremy

-- 
Tel:      +44 (1590) 610184
Cell:     +44 (7970) 676050
SkypeID: jeremybennett
Email:   [email protected]
Web:     www.embecosm.com

_______________________________________________
OpenRISC mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openrisc.net/listinfo/openrisc

Reply via email to