This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: altivec patches
- To: David Edelsohn <dje at watson dot ibm dot com>
- Subject: Re: altivec patches
- From: Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at redhat dot com>
- Date: 07 Nov 2001 13:11:56 -0500
- Cc: gcc patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- References: <200111071802.NAA30210@makai.watson.ibm.com>
On Wed, 2001-11-07 at 13:02, David Edelsohn wrote:
> I do not understand what the current proposal for
> BIGGEST_ALIGNMENT is. Are you proposing making it 128 all the time or ack
> to selecting the ABI?
i think rth was talking about the stack boundary when he suggested
things needed to be abi dependent. right now i have left biggest
alignment to be 128 regardless of ABI.
> I don't disagree with making BIGGEST_ALIGNMENT 128, but some AIX
> and Darwin macros use BIGGEST_ALIGNMENT and expect it to be 64. If you
> change BIGGEST_ALIGNMENT, the other macros in rs6000 directory need to use
> 64 or some other symbolic name for 64.
we could change them all to 128. or if people are paranoid we could set
it to:
(TARGET_ALTIVEC ? 128 : 64)
which would be dependent on -maltivec, and NOT -mabi=altivec.
basically, altivec instructions with current abi.
--
Aldy Hernandez E-mail: aldyh@redhat.com
Professional Gypsy
Red Hat, Inc.