This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Setting precision for a PSImode type
- From: Bernd Schmidt <bernds at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Peter Bigot <bigotp at acm dot org>
- Cc: <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2012 18:55:17 +0200
- Subject: Re: Setting precision for a PSImode type
- References: <CAPOJ94Nb9Ub5_746eriWOyP4aK--4d5hL591XnEShEH-4xP+6A@mail.gmail.com> <4F54EBFD.4060605@codesourcery.com> <CAPOJ94PfgJ9jg6Xkrftykn6KnO+cu3rfejUTBfPs4Nn=3X24EQ@mail.gmail.com>
On 04/11/2012 06:53 PM, Peter Bigot wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 10:38 AM, Bernd Schmidt <bernds@codesourcery.com> wrote:
>> On 03/05/2012 05:24 PM, Peter Bigot wrote:
>>> And is there any reason (other than it doesn't seem to have been done
>>> before) to believe PSImode is the wrong way to support a
>>> general-purpose 20-bit integral type in gcc?
>>
>> If you're using 4.7.0, it should be possible to use FRACTIONAL_INT_MODE
>> and get reasonable results. However, it hasn't been tested much, since
>> the final bits of the patch series which would have added 40 bit int
>> support to the C frontend didn't make it in. See the discussion following
>> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-07/msg00079.html
>
> I stuck with PARTIAL_INT_MODE instead of FRACTIONAL_INT_MODE because
> in my case the new type should not appear in the widen/narrow
> hierarchy of MODE_INT,
May I ask why not? Which problems do you run into?
> I've filed two bug reports for cases where BITSIZE needs to be updated
> to PRECISION.
Patches are best submitted to gcc-patches directly. Do you have a
copyright assignment?
Bernd