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: [RFC] Introducing MIPS O32 ABI Extension for FR0 and FR1 Interlinking

Matthew Fortune <> writes:
> As it stands I wasn't planning on supporting .module arch= I was just
> going to add .module fp= and leave it at that. The only thing I need to
> give assembly code writers absolute control over is the overall FP mode
> of the module. I don't currently see any real need to increase the
> control a user has over architecture level. If we had .module arch= then
> having it just set the arch ignorant of FP mode seems fine, checking for
> erroneous combinations would be difficult due to some chicken and egg
> scenarios. Do you think I need to add .module arch= if I add .module fp=
> or can I take the easy option?

Despite the "arch controlling fp" difference, I think .set and .module
should use common parsing code.  I.e. we should generalise s_mipsset to
handle both of them rather than write a second parsing function for .module.
There will be some cases where the function has to check "is this .set?"
(e.g. push/pop), but that's good IMO, because it makes the differences

If we do have a common routine then we should make .module handle everything
it can handle rather than just fp=.


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