On 8 Apr 2012, at 15:54, H.J. Lu wrote:
Despite the fact that bootstrap is restored, there remain problems
with this
patch and some more work is needed.
(a) [trivial] the option 'mx32' is in i386.opt, which means it is
exposed to
all sub-targets, even if they don't support it.
$ ./gcc/xgc
On Sun, Apr 8, 2012 at 4:38 AM, Iain Sandoe wrote:
> Hi H.J.
>
>
> On 31 Mar 2012, at 20:24, Jack Howarth wrote:
>>
>>
>> The latest gcc-pr52784-2.patch patch also allows current gcc trunk to
>> bootstrap on i386-apple-darwin10.
>
>
> Despite the fact that bootstrap is restored, there remain prob
Hi H.J.
On 31 Mar 2012, at 20:24, Jack Howarth wrote:
The latest gcc-pr52784-2.patch patch also allows current gcc trunk
to
bootstrap on i386-apple-darwin10.
Despite the fact that bootstrap is restored, there remain problems
with this patch and some more work is needed.
(a) [trivial]
On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 11:20:27AM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 1:36 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 1:23 PM, Jack Howarth
> > wrote:
> >> On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 11:32:37AM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote:
> >>> On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 11:05 AM, Jack Howarth
> >>> wrote
On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 1:36 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 1:23 PM, Jack Howarth
> wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 11:32:37AM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>> On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 11:05 AM, Jack Howarth
>>> wrote:
>>> > On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 09:18:13AM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>>
On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 1:23 PM, Jack Howarth wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 11:32:37AM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 11:05 AM, Jack Howarth
>> wrote:
>> > On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 09:18:13AM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> >> On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 8:11 AM, Rainer Orth
>> >> wrot
On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 11:32:37AM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 11:05 AM, Jack Howarth
> wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 09:18:13AM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote:
> >> On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 8:11 AM, Rainer Orth
> >> wrote:
> >> > Mike Stump writes:
> >> >
> >> >>> Here is the new
On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 11:05 AM, Jack Howarth wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 09:18:13AM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 8:11 AM, Rainer Orth
>> wrote:
>> > Mike Stump writes:
>> >
>> >>> Here is the new patch. OK for trunk if there are no regressions on
>> >>> Linux/ia32 and
On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 09:18:13AM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 8:11 AM, Rainer Orth
> wrote:
> > Mike Stump writes:
> >
> >>> Here is the new patch. OK for trunk if there are no regressions on
> >>> Linux/ia32 and Linux/x86-64?
> >>
> >> Too bad you didn't test 32-bit darwin,
On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 8:11 AM, Rainer Orth
wrote:
> Mike Stump writes:
>
>>> Here is the new patch. OK for trunk if there are no regressions on
>>> Linux/ia32 and Linux/x86-64?
>>
>> Too bad you didn't test 32-bit darwin, causes:
>>
>> http://gcc.gnu.org/PR52784
>>
>> Could you please revert
Mike Stump writes:
>> Here is the new patch. OK for trunk if there are no regressions on
>> Linux/ia32 and Linux/x86-64?
>
> Too bad you didn't test 32-bit darwin, causes:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/PR52784
>
> Could you please revert or fix, thanks.
Same problem on Solaris 10 and 11/x86.
On Mar 28, 2012, at 1:13 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>> config/darwin.c: && TARGET_64BIT
>>> config/darwin.c: && TARGET_64BIT
>>> config/darwin.c:: (TARGET_64BIT ? 2
>>> config/darwin.c: if (TARGET_64BIT && global_options.x_flag_objc_abi <
>>> 2)
>>> config/dar
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 03:40:28PM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 3:07 PM, Joseph S. Myers
> wrote:
> > On Wed, 28 Mar 2012, H.J. Lu wrote:
> >
> >> Here is the updated patch. I will wait for OK from Joseph.
> >
> > I have no comments on this patch.
> >
>
> Given that my patch d
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 3:07 PM, Joseph S. Myers
wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Mar 2012, H.J. Lu wrote:
>
>> Here is the updated patch. I will wait for OK from Joseph.
>
> I have no comments on this patch.
>
Given that my patch doesn't change any command line options,
I am checking it in. Please let me k
On Wed, 28 Mar 2012, H.J. Lu wrote:
> Here is the updated patch. I will wait for OK from Joseph.
I have no comments on this patch.
--
Joseph S. Myers
jos...@codesourcery.com
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 2:17 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 2:10 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 10:13 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>> On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 12:51 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 9:33 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> What do we do with
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 2:10 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 10:13 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 12:51 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>>> On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 9:33 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>>
What do we do with TARGET_64BIT and TARGET_64BIT_DEFAULT? They
are us
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 10:13 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 12:51 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 9:33 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>
>>> What do we do with TARGET_64BIT and TARGET_64BIT_DEFAULT? They
>>> are used to indicate 64bit ISA like:
>>>
>>> collect2.c:/* TARGET_
On Mar 28, 2012, at 12:44 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
>> config/darwin.c:&& TARGET_64BIT
>> config/darwin.c:&& TARGET_64BIT
>> config/darwin.c: : (TARGET_64BIT ? 2
>> config/darwin.c: if (TARGET_64BIT && global_options.x_flag_objc_abi < 2)
>> config/darwin.c:
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 12:51 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 9:33 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>
>> What do we do with TARGET_64BIT and TARGET_64BIT_DEFAULT? They
>> are used to indicate 64bit ISA like:
>>
>> collect2.c:/* TARGET_64BIT may be defined to use driver specific
>> functionali
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 9:33 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> What do we do with TARGET_64BIT and TARGET_64BIT_DEFAULT? They
> are used to indicate 64bit ISA like:
>
> collect2.c:/* TARGET_64BIT may be defined to use driver specific
> functionality. */
> collect2.c:#undef TARGET_64BIT
> collect2.c:#define T
On Wed, 28 Mar 2012, H.J. Lu wrote:
> collect2.c:/* TARGET_64BIT may be defined to use driver specific
> functionality. */
> collect2.c:#undef TARGET_64BIT
> collect2.c:#define TARGET_64BIT TARGET_64BIT_DEFAULT
As previously discussed, this use is a bug; TARGET_64BIT should be
considered private
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 3:17 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 7:48 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>
>>> OPTION_MASK_ISA_64BIT 32bit x86-64 code or 64bit x86-64 code
>>> OPTION_MASK_ISA_X86_64 64bit x86-64 code
>>> OPTION_MASK_ISA_X32 32bit x86-64 code
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 7:48 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> OPTION_MASK_ISA_64BIT 32bit x86-64 code or 64bit x86-64 code
>> OPTION_MASK_ISA_X86_64 64bit x86-64 code
>> OPTION_MASK_ISA_X32 32bit x86-64 code
How annoying, the first one doesn't mean what it says.
OPT
On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 03:42:29PM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote:
> Hi,
>
> In i386 option mask, there is OPTION_MASK_ISA_64BIT for -m64 or -mx32
> code generations and OPTION_MASK_ISA_X32 for -mx32 code generation. We
> support
>
> -m64: OPTION_MASK_ISA_64BIT && !OPTION_MASK_ISA_X32
> -mx32: OPTION_MASK_
Hi,
In i386 option mask, there is OPTION_MASK_ISA_64BIT for -m64 or -mx32
code generations and OPTION_MASK_ISA_X32 for -mx32 code generation. We
support
-m64: OPTION_MASK_ISA_64BIT && !OPTION_MASK_ISA_X32
-mx32: OPTION_MASK_ISA_64BIT && OPTION_MASK_ISA_X32
-m32: !OPTION_MASK_ISA_64BIT
i386.opt h
26 matches
Mail list logo
