[ping] residual TImode patch PR28617
Jack Howarth
howarth@bromo.msbb.uc.edu
Mon Sep 25 13:38:00 GMT 2006
Mark,
Can you respond on Geoff's query about the residual sections of
the patch to fix PR28617 going into gcc trunk. The patch in question
is only...
Index: gcc/config/rs6000/t-darwin
===================================================================
--- gcc/config/rs6000/t-darwin (revision 116801)
+++ gcc/config/rs6000/t-darwin (working copy)
@@ -1,4 +1,6 @@
LIB2FUNCS_EXTRA = $(srcdir)/config/rs6000/darwin-tramp.asm \
+ $(srcdir)/config/rs6000/ppc64-fp.c \
+ $(srcdir)/config/darwin-64.c \
$(srcdir)/config/rs6000/darwin-ldouble.c
LIB2FUNCS_STATIC_EXTRA = \
Index: gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.h
===================================================================
--- gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.h (revision 116801)
+++ gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.h (working copy)
@@ -178,7 +178,7 @@
#ifdef IN_LIBGCC2
/* For libgcc2 we make sure this is a compile time constant */
-#if defined (__64BIT__) || defined (__powerpc64__)
+#if defined (__64BIT__) || defined (__powerpc64__) || defined (__ppc64__)
#undef TARGET_POWERPC64
#define TARGET_POWERPC64 1
#else
Index: gcc/config/rs6000/ppc64-fp.c
===================================================================
--- gcc/config/rs6000/ppc64-fp.c (revision 116801)
+++ gcc/config/rs6000/ppc64-fp.c (working copy)
@@ -30,7 +30,7 @@ along with GCC; see the file COPYING. I
Software Foundation, 51 Franklin Street, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA
02110-1301, USA. */
-#if defined(__powerpc64__) || defined (__64BIT__)
+#if defined(__powerpc64__) || defined (__64BIT__) || defined(__ppc64__)
#define TMODES
#include "config/fp-bit.h"
Geoff question was...
>On 12/09/2006, at 1:24 PM, Jack Howarth wrote:
>> Geoff,
>> I noticed you felt comfortable checking in the large
>> DWARF file name handling speedup patch. Might you reconsider
>> the residual parts of the PR28617 TImode patch?
>
>The DWARF patch differed in three ways:
>- I'd had several months experience with it in the Apple compiler
>- it had no known bugs
>- it was a speed improvement, and thus counts as a regression fix
>
>However, if Mark's comfortable with adding this new feature at this
>point in the release cycle (and possibly needing to fix problems with
>it later), then I'm happy to put it in.
Thanks in advance for a decision on this.
Jac
More information about the Gcc-patches
mailing list