This is the mail archive of the 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: m68k bootstrapping broken

Gunther Nikl wrote:
On Sun, Jan 11, 2004 at 07:32:54AM +0100, Bernardo Innocenti wrote:

Just an idea: m68k is the only cc0 target capable of an hosted bootstrap.

I wonder how hard it would be to change m68k into a non-cc0 port.

I'm not sure what the benefits/disadvantages of cc0/non-cc0 targets are... Is there any documentation on this topic or shall I dig in the mailing list archives?

Is it possible that middle-end changes have subtly broken cc0 targets
without anyone noticing except on the m68k?

Its surprising that suddenly CC bugs show up. This is already the second time that not initializing CC is the reason for breakage of m68k.

Yeah. We also have intermittent bugs due to insn constraints not covering all possible uses. It keeps appearing in random versions of GCC and with random combinations of options affecting code generation.

After years of stratification the m68k backend has finally been
cleaned up, at least superficially (i.e.: the code is now
readable ;-).

The next step would be incrementally switching old stuff to
modern GCC design practices.  There was a discussion some time
ago about adding insn patterns for movem and use rtx function
prologues and epilogues instead of the current mess.

By the way, for anyone interested I've just posted the testsuite results for m68k-netbsdelf:

I'm going to run the testsuite again with Andreas' latest patch, and I'll soon be able to do regression testing on m68k-linux thanks to the kind support from the debian-m68k people.

 // Bernardo Innocenti - Develer S.r.l., R&D dept.

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