This is the mail archive of the
java-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the Java project.
Re: PATCH: libffi: improvements for MIPS o32.
- From: Richard Sandiford <rsandifo at redhat dot com>
- To: David Daney <ddaney at avtrex dot com>
- Cc: Casey Marshall <csm at gnu dot org>, java-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, Eric Christopher <echristo at redhat dot com>
- Date: Thu, 01 Jul 2004 07:44:14 +0100
- Subject: Re: PATCH: libffi: improvements for MIPS o32.
- References: <87hdssn6f3.fsf@gnu.org> <40E33008.4080408@avtrex.com><878ye4mzvl.fsf@gnu.org> <40E34DF7.1070209@avtrex.com>
David Daney <ddaney@avtrex.com> writes:
> Does it make sense to check the value of __mips_soft_float when building
> libffi to control how it (libffi) handles the differences between o32 w/
> FPU and o32 w/ soft float?
Sounds reasonable. __mips_soft_float will be defined iff gcc is
using the soft-float version of the ABI.
> Do n32 and n64 have similar issues?
Yes.
> If so, doesn't this mean that in effect there are 6 mips ABIs (o32, n32
> and n64) x (hard_float, soft_float)?
Yes. Plus there's the abicalls/non-abicalls difference, which at least
from one POV bumps it up to 12. For example, $gp is call-clobbered in
o32 abicalls code but effectively call-saved in o32 non-abicalls code.
I don't know how much the abicalls differences will affect libffi though.
I guess you're just interested in abicalls anyway.
Richard