This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH, MIPS] Add Octeon target
- From: David Daney <ddaney at avtrex dot com>
- To: Adam Nemet <anemet at caviumnetworks dot com>
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 13:03:52 -0700
- Subject: Re: [PATCH, MIPS] Add Octeon target
- References: <48ADBDFA.3030406@caviumnetworks.com>
Adam Nemet wrote:
> --- gcc.orig/config.gcc 2008-08-18 18:56:11.000000000 -0700
> +++ gcc/config.gcc 2008-08-18 19:07:37.000000000 -0700
> @@ -1551,6 +1551,10 @@ mips64*-*-linux* | mipsisa64*-*-linux*)
> tm_file="${tm_file} mips/st.h"
> tmake_file="${tmake_file} mips/t-st"
> ;;
> + mips64octeon*-*-linux*)
> + tm_defines="${tm_defines} MIPS_CPU_STRING_DEFAULT=\\\"octeon\\\""
> + target_cpu_default=MASK_SOFT_FLOAT_ABI
> + ;;
> mipsisa64r2*-*-linux*)
> tm_defines="${tm_defines} MIPS_ISA_DEFAULT=65"
> ;;
What is the advantage of this over configuring with
--target=mips64-unknown-linux --with-float=soft --with-cpu=octeon ?
The reason I ask, is that several years ago echristo and I discussed
removing the mipsfoo* configure targets in favour of specifying the
configuration with the --with* specifiers
What happens when someone adds an FPU to the octeon or there is an
octeonr2 ISA? What will config.gcc have to look like then?
However despite the fact that I am sending this message, I really
don't feel strongly about it. I thought I would raise the issue
though.
David Daney