This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: RFA: Add Epiphany port


Quoting "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph@codesourcery.com>:

+@item -mstack-offse@var{num}

It appears to be -mstack-offset=@var{num}, not -mstack-offse@var{num}.

Yes, I typoed a backspace for an =.


Index: gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pragma-pack-3.c
===================================================================
--- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pragma-pack-3.c	(revision 180805)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pragma-pack-3.c	(working copy)
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 /* PR c++/25294 */
 /* { dg-options "-std=gnu99" } */
-/* { dg-do run } */
+/* { dg-do run { target { ! epiphany-*-* } } } */

What's non-portable about this test? Whatever it is, an effective-target keyword would be better than hardcoding a reference to the particular target.

Albeit struct T gets packed, Epiphany makes struct S 8-byte aligned, so the total size is 16.

Index: gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/weak/typeof-2.c
===================================================================
--- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/weak/typeof-2.c	(revision 180805)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/weak/typeof-2.c	(working copy)
@@ -5,6 +5,7 @@
 /* { dg-require-weak "" } */
 /* { dg-require-alias "" } */
 /* { dg-options "-O2" } */
+/* { dg-options "-O2 -mshort-calls" { target epiphany-*-* } } */

Comment about the reason for this option?

Would this be OK?


 /* { dg-options "-O2" } */
+/* Using -mshort-calls avoids constant loading the function addresses in
+   registers and thus getting the counts wrong.  */
+/* { dg-options "-O2 -mshort-calls" { target epiphany-*-* } } */


+/* We would like to use Posix for profiling, but the simulator interface
+   lacks mkdir.  */
+#undef TARGET_POSIX_IO

This doesn't belong in a generic file for a given CPU. It might go in a file for a (CPU, OS) combination - but it's the bare-metal default anyway.

The original idea was to define TARGET_POSIX_IO, but as the comment states, we got to fix the simulator first. So are you saying I need a special file for the singular (CPU, no-OS) combination if I want to set TARGET_POSIX_IO ?


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]