Re: New port^2: Renesas RL78

2011-11-29 Thread Richard Henderson
On 11/28/2011 12:28 PM, DJ Delorie wrote: Ping? Anything else for this? http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-11/msg02178.html http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-11/msg01467.html http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-11/msg01356.html Not that I know of. As far as I'm concerned you

Re: New port^2: Renesas RL78

2011-11-29 Thread DJ Delorie
Excellent. Thanks!

Re: New port^2: Renesas RL78

2011-11-28 Thread DJ Delorie
Ping? Anything else for this? http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-11/msg02178.html http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-11/msg01467.html http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-11/msg01356.html

Re: New port^2: Renesas RL78

2011-11-21 Thread DJ Delorie
rl rs, mind sorting this in? Oops. I'd been putting RL78 before RX for so long it seemed natural (it's been powerpc so far, which doesn't come between rl78 and rx) Index: gcc/doc/extend.texi === -the SPU and M32C targets

Re: New port^2: Renesas RL78

2011-11-19 Thread Gerald Pfeifer
On Wed, 9 Nov 2011, DJ Delorie wrote: Index: MAINTAINERS === rs6000 port Geoff Keating geo...@geoffk.org rs6000 port David Edelsohn dje@gmail.com rs6000 vector extns Aldy Hernandez

Re: New port^2: Renesas RL78

2011-11-10 Thread Richard Henderson
+# non-PIC targets always get an array-bounds error in thread_prologue_and_epilogue_insns +function.o-warn = -Wno-error Didn't we find another way to fix this? In any case this is not present in your changelog. Otherwise the port is looking ok. r~

Re: New port^2: Renesas RL78

2011-11-10 Thread DJ Delorie
Didn't we find another way to fix this? In any case this is not present in your changelog. Yes, please ignore that. I do svn diff and then have to cut out all the bits that aren't part of the base port itself.

Re: New port^2: Renesas RL78

2011-11-08 Thread DJ Delorie
(define_expand umulqihi3 [(set (match_operand:HI 0 register_operand) (mult:HI (zero_extend:HI (match_operand:QI 1 register_operand)) (zero_extend:HI (match_operand:QI 2 register_operand] 0 ) Just delete it? No, we actually have that insn.

Re: New port^2: Renesas RL78

2011-11-05 Thread Richard Henderson
On 11/04/2011 10:09 PM, DJ Delorie wrote: The problem I'm trying to solve with that is that there's only one segment register (ES) so you only need to force an operand non-far if *both* operands are far. Not sure if the function is implemented that way, but I coded the expanders that way.

Re: New port^2: Renesas RL78

2011-11-04 Thread Richard Henderson
(define_expand zero_extendqihi2 [(set (match_operand:HI 0 nonimmediate_operand) (zero_extend:HI (match_operand:QI 1 general_operand)))] if (rl78_force_nonfar_2 (operands, gen_zero_extendqihi2)) DONE; ) You should be able to simply rl78_nonfar_operand

Re: New port^2: Renesas RL78

2011-11-04 Thread DJ Delorie
(define_expand zero_extendqihi2 [(set (match_operand:HI 0 nonimmediate_operand) (zero_extend:HI (match_operand:QI 1 general_operand)))] if (rl78_force_nonfar_2 (operands, gen_zero_extendqihi2)) DONE; ) You should be able to simply