On 2018-10-09 14:59, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 09/10/2018 14:55, Chris Johns wrote:
On 9/10/18 4:20 am, Sebastian Huber wrote:
I don't have a problem with this patch, but what is the long term
strategy for
Gaisler-specific machine options in GCC and clang? I am pretty sure
this
divergence will trouble users at some point.
Can we assume there will be all, some or any compatibility for
machine options
between the two compilers?
The SPARC GCC maintainer has its own opinion with respect to machine
options, but in general, I think we should be able to keep the
Gaisler-specific options of GCC and clang compatible.
I agree, that must be the goal. Other flags we are about to introduce
like -mflat will for example also have the same names as in GCC. I
believe Daniel C. already made a patch to introduce the -mfix- flags,
however not upstreamed or reviewed yet so until then I think we need
this fix, unless gaisler carry it locally. If we get it accepted into
clang we will revert this patch in RTEMS of course.
Daniel
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@rtems.org
http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
