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: [MIPS r5900] libgcc floating point fixes


Woon yung Liu <ysai187@yahoo.com> wries
> Bump! Sorry, but could I please get an answer? I'm willing to update the patch without
> credit, if necessary.

Hi WY,

Apologies for exceptionally slow response.

The patch you referenced is mostly OK but I would like to get the MIPS16 check
changed to a configure time check for MIPS16 support rather than checking for
r5900. I.e. I think we should have GCC raise an error for -march=r5900 -mips16
and then a configure time check using just -mips16 would fail. That can then
be used to choose whether to build the mips16 code instead of this:

+	if test x$with_arch != xr5900; then
+		tmake_file="$tmake_file mips/t-mips16"
+	fi

This change should also make it possible to have mips.exp simply skip the mips16
tests for r5900 without having to tell it explicitly about r5900.

Thanks,
Matthew

> The patch is working for the R5900 hard-fp mode. I've also used the same, patched copy of
> GCC, to build the toolchain for the IOP (MIPS R3000A, 32-bit MIPS I with no FPU) and it
> also builds correctly.
> 
> If I should be writing to someone else specifically, could someone please tell me who I
> should be writing to instead?
> 
> 
> Thanks and regards,
> -W Y
> 
> 
> 
> On Tuesday, January 26, 2016 5:41 PM, Woon yung Liu <ysai187@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I refer to the previous message by Juergen, regarding his patch to libgcc.
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-08/msg01725.html
> 
> As of now, libgcc (of GCC v5.3.0) still has the problem of building support for both soft
> and hard floats, when there is no support for hard floats by the R5900 (and hence
> resulting in the generation of recursive functions like extendsfdf2).
> 
> That patch doesn't seem to have been committed. I would very much like to help to see it
> get committed because GCC's support for the R5900 is currently not suitable for
> PlayStation 2 development; software-floating point emulation is severely detrimental to
> performance.
> What else needs to be done first, before it can be accepted?
> 
> Thanks and regards,
> -W Y

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