Re: Housekeeping work in backends.html

> Perhaps 'd' should just go away completely. It was intended to > distinguish between ports using the old scheduler description and > ports using the DFA model. Applied. -- Eric BotcazouIndex: backends.html === RCS file: /cvs/gcc/w

Re: Housekeeping work in backends.html

> Perhaps 'd' should just go away completely. It was intended to > distinguish between ports using the old scheduler description and > ports using the DFA model. But support for the old scheduler > description was removed some 10 years ago, and AFAIR the targets that > don't use the DFA scheduler d

Re: Housekeeping work in backends.html

On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 9:42 AM, Eric Botcazou wrote: >> the attached patch removes obsolete ports (c4x, m68hc11 and ms1), toggles >> the 'p' letter and adjust accordingly (only avr, fr30, m68k, mcore, rs6000 >> and sh still use define_peephole) and removes trailing spaces. > > Same treatment for th

Re: Housekeeping work in backends.html

> the attached patch removes obsolete ports (c4x, m68hc11 and ms1), toggles > the 'p' letter and adjust accordingly (only avr, fr30, m68k, mcore, rs6000 > and sh still use define_peephole) and removes trailing spaces. Same treatment for the 'b' letter, the ports that uses '"* ..."' notation for o

Re: Housekeeping work in backends.html

> For the moxie, nvptx, rl178 and rx ports, maintainers can send me the string > as Sandra did for the nios2 port and I'll update the document. DJ kindly sent them for both ports so I have installed them. -- Eric BotcazouIndex: backends.html ==

Re: Housekeeping work in backends.html

> I think I got this right > >| Characteristics > > Target | HMSLQNFICBD lqrcpfgmbdiates > ---+ > moxie | F g ds Thanks, applied, but I think that 't' could be added because AFAICS every insn (not expander) g

Re: Housekeeping work in backends.html

Eric Botcazou writes: > Some ports are missing (lm32, moxie, nios2, nvptx, rl78, rx) so the relevant > maintainers are CCed (see 6.3.9 Anatomy of a Target Back End in the doc). I think I got this right | Characteristics Target | HMSLQNFICBD lqrcpfgmbdiates ---+-

Re: Housekeeping work in backends.html

> H - you could argue a hardware implementation does not exist as it's a > virtual target, but it can obviously be compiled down to run on > hardware that does exist. Agreed. > Q - "registers" are typed and you can declare 64 bit registers, so > probably this is true OK. > f - No

Re: Housekeeping work in backends.html

On 01/07/2015 12:39 AM, Eric Botcazou wrote: Some ports are missing (lm32, moxie, nios2, nvptx, rl78, rx) so the relevant maintainers are CCed (see 6.3.9 Anatomy of a Target Back End in the doc). The page is directly browsable at https://gcc.gnu.org/backends.html For the moxie, nvptx, rl178 an

Re: Housekeeping work in backends.html

> the attached patch removes obsolete ports (c4x, m68hc11 and ms1), toggles > the 'p' letter and adjust accordingly (only avr, fr30, m68k, mcore, rs6000 > and sh still use define_peephole) and removes trailing spaces. This replaces 'a' with 'i' for multiple inheritance thunks and reuses 'a' for L

Re: Housekeeping work in backends.html

> the attached patch removes obsolete ports (c4x, m68hc11 and ms1), toggles > the 'p' letter and adjust accordingly (only avr, fr30, m68k, mcore, rs6000 > and sh still use define_peephole) and removes trailing spaces. Same treatment for the 'd' letter, the ports that do not use DFA scheduler desc

Re: Housekeeping work in backends.html

> Xtensa is now supported by the QEMU, so probably question mark in its 'S' > slot may be removed. Done, thanks. -- Eric Botcazou

Re: Housekeeping work in backends.html

Hi Eric, On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 2:39 AM, Eric Botcazou wrote: > The page is directly browsable at https://gcc.gnu.org/backends.html > > For the moxie, nvptx, rl178 and rx ports, maintainers can send me the string > as Sandra did for the nios2 port and I'll update the document. Xtensa is now supp

Re: Housekeeping work in backends.html

> Some ports are missing (lm32, moxie, nios2, nvptx, rl78, rx) so the relevant > maintainers are CCed (see 6.3.9 Anatomy of a Target Back End in the doc). The page is directly browsable at https://gcc.gnu.org/backends.html For the moxie, nvptx, rl178 and rx ports, maintainers can send me the stri

Re: Housekeeping work in backends.html

> I think that for nios2 the correct entry is probably "SCpd", but the > descriptions of some of the things in the table are too terse for me to > be 100% sure that's correct. E.g., the nios2 architecture doesn't > include the concept of "condition codes" at all, so how many registers > they might

Re: Housekeeping work in backends.html

> I might claim updating this shouldn't ever require a review :-) OK, it was mainly about toggling the 'p' letter... I have installed the attached patch for lm32 (based on info privately provided by Sébastien) and visium. -- Eric BotcazouIndex: backends.html ===

Re: Housekeeping work in backends.html

On 01/05/2015 04:15 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote: Hi, the attached patch removes obsolete ports (c4x, m68hc11 and ms1), toggles the 'p' letter and adjust accordingly (only avr, fr30, m68k, mcore, rs6000 and sh still use define_peephole) and removes trailing spaces. OK to commit? Some ports are miss

Re: Housekeeping work in backends.html

On 01/05/15 16:15, Eric Botcazou wrote: Hi, the attached patch removes obsolete ports (c4x, m68hc11 and ms1), toggles the 'p' letter and adjust accordingly (only avr, fr30, m68k, mcore, rs6000 and sh still use define_peephole) and removes trailing spaces. OK to commit? Some ports are missing (