[PATCH 3/4] Add Visium support to gcc

[Eric Botcazou]

> Use of `%s' in diagnostics is long obsoleted by %qs (in this case, using
> %qE with the identifier directly, rather than using IDENTIFIER_POINTER, is
> preferred).

Only occurrence fixed by mimicing the i386 port.

> INTVAL / UINTVAL return HOST_WIDE_INT / unsigned HOST_WIDE_INT, not long /
> unsigned long.  You have lots of uses of fprintf that presume they return
> long / unsigned long.

Changed into HOST_WIDE_INT_PRINT_DEC/HOST_WIDE_INT_PRINT_UNSIGNED.

> As you have the interrupt attribute, you need to add this port to the list
> in extend.texi of ports with this attribute.  (Generally, check the
> checklist of pieces in sourcebuild.texi to update for a new port.)

Done.  But there is a bit of a contradiction in sourcebuild.texi:

   * Entries in `gcc/doc/install.texi' for all target triplets
     supported with this target architecture, giving details of any
     special notes about installation for this target, or saying that
     there are no special notes if there are none.

But gcc/doc/install.texi has:

Note that this list of install notes is @emph{not} a list of supported
hosts or targets.  Not all supported hosts and targets are listed
here, only the ones that require host-specific or target-specific
information have to. 

I have nevertheless added visium-*-elf to gcc/doc/install.texi.

I'll note that libbacktrace, libcc1, libcilkrts, liboffloadmic, libsanitizer 
and libvtv are not documented in there.

> At least one target for this port should be added to contrib/config-list.mk

This is documented in sourcebuild.texi, I'll take the 5 steps covered by "If 
the back end is added to the official GCC source repository, the following are 
also necessary:" when the premise is fulfilled.

> (and you should verify that the port builds cleanly with --enable-werror
> -always, for both 32-bit and 64-bit hosts, when building using current trunk 
> GCC).

Do you mean a bootstrap of the cross-compiler with --enable-werror-always on a 
32-bit and a 64-bit host?  OK, I'll do that.

Thanks for the review.

-- 
Eric Botcazou