On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 9:45 AM, Richard Guenther
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 3:45 PM, Kai Tietz ktiet...@googlemail.com wrote:
2011/5/4 Richard Guenther richard.guent...@gmail.com:
On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 10:17 AM, Andreas Krebbel
kreb...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 10:17 AM, Andreas Krebbel
kreb...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
Hi,
the attached patch uses the existing promote_function_mode hook. For
a libcall neither TYPE nor FNTYPE is available so I had to change a
few related function in order to deal with that.
The patch also
2011/5/4 Richard Guenther richard.guent...@gmail.com:
On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 10:17 AM, Andreas Krebbel
kreb...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
Hi,
the attached patch uses the existing promote_function_mode hook. For
a libcall neither TYPE nor FNTYPE is available so I had to change a
few related
On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 3:45 PM, Kai Tietz ktiet...@googlemail.com wrote:
2011/5/4 Richard Guenther richard.guent...@gmail.com:
On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 10:17 AM, Andreas Krebbel
kreb...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
Hi,
the attached patch uses the existing promote_function_mode hook. For
a
Andreas Krebbel kreb...@linux.vnet.ibm.com writes:
2011-04-18 Andreas Krebbel andreas.kreb...@de.ibm.com
* calls.c (emit_library_call_value_1): Invoke
promote_function_mode hook on libcall arguments.
* explow.c (promote_function_mode, promote_mode): Handle TYPE
On 04/13/2011 03:31 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
Andreas Krebbel kreb...@linux.vnet.ibm.com writes:
This fixes a wrong code generation bug for sw DFP:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-03/msg00141.html
Why do we need a new target hook just for libcalls? Why not just use
the existing
Andreas Krebbel kreb...@linux.vnet.ibm.com writes:
On 04/13/2011 03:31 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
Andreas Krebbel kreb...@linux.vnet.ibm.com writes:
This fixes a wrong code generation bug for sw DFP:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-03/msg00141.html
Why do we need a new target
