This is the mail archive of the gcc@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: [PATCH] sparc64-linux --with-cpu=ultrasparc fix


Jakub Jelinek wrote:
What's the right way to get gcc to default to building 64 bit executables
when targeting sparc64-linux [and --with-cpu=ultrasparc3]?


There was TARGET_CPU_ultrasparc3 missing in linux64.h.
I've commited the following fix to the trunk, but as it is not a regression,
I'm not sure if Mark is ok with this for gcc-3_4-branch.

2004-05-01 Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>

	* config/sparc/linux64.h (TARGET_DEFAULT): Make 64-bit by default
	also for TARGET_CPU_DEFAULT == TARGET_CPU_ultrasparc3.

--- gcc/config/sparc/linux64.h.jj 2004-05-01 22:59:52.000000000 +0200
+++ gcc/config/sparc/linux64.h 2004-05-01 23:00:41.126176529 +0200
@@ -39,7 +39,9 @@ Boston, MA 02111-1307, USA. */
#undef MD_EXEC_PREFIX
#undef MD_STARTFILE_PREFIX
-#if TARGET_CPU_DEFAULT == TARGET_CPU_v9 || TARGET_CPU_DEFAULT == TARGET_CPU_ultrasparc
+#if TARGET_CPU_DEFAULT == TARGET_CPU_v9 \
+ || TARGET_CPU_DEFAULT == TARGET_CPU_ultrasparc \
+ || TARGET_CPU_DEFAULT == TARGET_CPU_ultrasparc3
/* A 64 bit v9 compiler with stack-bias,
in a Medium/Low code model environment. */

Ah, thanks. That got me past the problem. Sadly, I seem to have run into a new one, this time gcc-3.4.0 seems to be generating a bad floating point register name when building glibc; I've filed a bug at http://gcc.gnu.org/PR15247 with a minimal test case. (Hope I didn't miss a known fix; I did look through the gcc bug database.) - Dan

--
My technical stuff: http://kegel.com
My politics: see http://www.misleader.org for examples of why I'm for regime change


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