ping
Quoting Gabe Black :
Ping...
On 05/05/11 10:38, Steve Reinhardt wrote:
On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 2:25 PM, Gabe Black wrote:
Did that make sense?
I see how that could work... I think I was more puzzled by how you would
figure out that
for (int i = 0; i < 7; i++)
Dest.bytes[
Ping...
On 05/05/11 10:38, Steve Reinhardt wrote:
> On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 2:25 PM, Gabe Black wrote:
>
>> Did that make sense?
>
> I see how that could work... I think I was more puzzled by how you would
> figure out that
>
> for (int i = 0; i < 7; i++)
> Dest.bytes[i] = Source1.byte
On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 2:25 PM, Gabe Black wrote:
> Did that make sense?
I see how that could work... I think I was more puzzled by how you would
figure out that
for (int i = 0; i < 7; i++)
Dest.bytes[i] = Source1.bytes[i] + Source2.bytes[i];
overwrote all of Dest, but
for (i
On 04/27/11 22:14, Gabe Black wrote:
> My idea is to be able to inherit from the standard op types like
> IntRegOperand and allow them to install more than one index and/or
> change how they're declared, read, and written. So say for example you
> had a 128 bit wide SIMD instruction
My idea is to be able to inherit from the standard op types like
IntRegOperand and allow them to install more than one index and/or
change how they're declared, read, and written. So say for example you
had a 128 bit wide SIMD instruction operating on four floating point
r
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 10:14 AM, Gabe Black wrote:
> On 04/27/11 08:02, Steve Reinhardt wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 1:21 AM, Gabe Black
> wrote:
> >
> >>> Perhaps the heuristics could simply be extended to deal with
> >>> structure field accesses... if the thing after the symbol is a "."
On 04/27/11 08:02, Steve Reinhardt wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 1:21 AM, Gabe Black wrote:
>
>> The XML thing is an interesting possibility, and it avoids having to
>> make a whole new thing that understands C++. It would still mean we'd
>> have to make a whole new thing that understands XML (
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 1:21 AM, Gabe Black wrote:
> The XML thing is an interesting possibility, and it avoids having to
> make a whole new thing that understands C++. It would still mean we'd
> have to make a whole new thing that understands XML (which is much
> easier), but then there's the ch
>> Before I mentioned using @, and I have a patch that makes that change in
>> the parser and in all the ISA descs. It was less painful than you may
>> assume.
>>
> I haven't looked at your patches yet... is the main point of switching from
> . to @ to allow structure field accesses?
Basically. I
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 9:45 PM, Gabriel Michael Black <
gbl...@eecs.umich.edu> wrote:
> People not working with the ISA parser can stop here.
>
Here I am :-).
> Before I mentioned using @, and I have a patch that makes that change in
> the parser and in all the ISA descs. It was less painful t
People not working with the ISA parser can stop here.
I have my changes out for review which remove the special handling of
the twin data types which are used for twin loads and stores in SPARC,
and generally demote integers and floating point values to simply be
opaque types. That's not qu
11 matches
Mail list logo
