This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [RFC] Introducing MIPS O32 ABI Extension for FR0 and FR1 Interlinking
- From: Richard Sandiford <rdsandiford at googlemail dot com>
- To: Matthew Fortune <Matthew dot Fortune at imgtec dot com>
- Cc: "gcc\ at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Rich Fuhler <Rich dot Fuhler at imgtec dot com>, "macro\ at codesourcery dot com" <macro at codesourcery dot com>, "Joseph Myers \(joseph\ at codesourcery dot com\)" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>, "Moore\, Catherine \(Catherine_Moore\ at mentor dot com\)" <Catherine_Moore at mentor dot com>
- Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 07:44:21 +0000
- Subject: Re: [RFC] Introducing MIPS O32 ABI Extension for FR0 and FR1 Interlinking
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <6D39441BF12EF246A7ABCE6654B023534AAE6E at LEMAIL01 dot le dot imgtec dot org> <6D39441BF12EF246A7ABCE6654B023534AC1F0 at LEMAIL01 dot le dot imgtec dot org> <878ut0fj45 dot fsf at talisman dot default> <6D39441BF12EF246A7ABCE6654B023534AD16E at LEMAIL01 dot le dot imgtec dot org> <87ppmbdobm dot fsf at talisman dot default> <6D39441BF12EF246A7ABCE6654B023534AEB92 at LEMAIL01 dot le dot imgtec dot org> <6D39441BF12EF246A7ABCE6654B023534B4C29 at LEMAIL01 dot le dot imgtec dot org> <87r46hbybi dot fsf at talisman dot default> <6D39441BF12EF246A7ABCE6654B023534B572B at LEMAIL01 dot le dot imgtec dot org> <87mwh5bslv dot fsf at talisman dot default> <6D39441BF12EF246A7ABCE6654B023534B581D at LEMAIL01 dot le dot imgtec dot org> <8761nsbj9w dot fsf at talisman dot default> <6D39441BF12EF246A7ABCE6654B023534B7B3A at LEMAIL01 dot le dot imgtec dot org> <871tygbexk dot fsf at talisman dot default> <6D39441BF12EF246A7ABCE6654B023534B7FA7 at LEMAIL01 dot le dot imgtec dot org> <87wqg89pvq dot fsf at talisman dot default> <6D39441BF12EF246A7ABCE6654B023534C0BEE at LEMAIL01 dot le dot imgtec dot org> <874n31i4qj dot fsf at talisman dot default> <6D39441BF12EF246A7ABCE6654B023534C3E04 at LEMAIL01 dot le dot imgtec dot org> <87vbvch70x dot fsf at talisman dot default> <6D39441BF12EF246A7ABCE6654B023534C4A69 at LEMAIL01 dot le dot imgtec dot org>
Matthew Fortune <Matthew.Fortune@imgtec.com> 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
obvious.
If we do have a common routine then we should make .module handle everything
it can handle rather than just fp=.
Thanks,
Richard