This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [TESTCASE] Minimized testcase for AltiVec segfault
- From: Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at redhat dot com>
- To: Daniel Egger <degger at fhm dot edu>
- Cc: GCC Developer Mailinglist <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2002 10:10:09 +1100
- Subject: Re: [TESTCASE] Minimized testcase for AltiVec segfault
On Thursday, February 28, 2002, at 09:58 AM, Daniel Egger wrote:
> Am Mit, 2002-02-27 um 05.52 schrieb Aldy Hernandez:
>> second, it would probably better if you configured with
>> did you do that? if so, you don't need to pass -maltivec or
> DOH! It does work with -mabi=altivec though you should really explain
> to me why it will affect address generation like this:
aha! told you :)
> registers so they don't get clobbered. After all it still might be a bug
> which should be fixed.
it's a bit tricky. i don't see any way of altivec working without
-mabi=altivec, but we couldn't just blindly modify the abi just because
we had altivec enabled, so we had to add another flag.
it is theoretically possible to use -maltivec without the altivec abi,
but that doesn't make much sense because you won't have VRSAVE set,
you won't get varargs (which are broken right now anyhow :-)) working,
you can't get the stack adjusted properly for the vector arguments,
i think -maltivec without the abi changes is there for somebody who
*really* knows what s/he's doing, has everything aligned properly, and
wants to have a function callable from non altivec compiled functions.
i guess... i can't see other reasons for it. that's why
the proper blessed way of building an altivec toolchain, sets the abi