On 11/04/14 05:35, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
Ports that want to be hosts for offloading may need to modify their
modes.def. The patch below contains changes to i386-modes.def which
modifies XFmode depending on a target switch. I'm not actually entirely
sure what to do about this. Do we want to make this flag an error when
offloading is enabled? Or maybe add float format support to the
-foffload-abi option?
Thoughts? Ok for the first part of the patch once the other offloading
patches have gone in (bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-linux)?
It feels like we've got another real distinction to make. We've had
host, build & target and they're all independent. It feels like we need
offload target and better separate between target and offload target.
Then we need to figure out the places where we've got bleed-out.
Is this a question of terminology? I agree that saying "offload host"
when we'd normally be calling it the "target" is confusing, but it's
difficult to come up with better names.
No, I don't think it's terminology. It's really that in effect we have
two targets. One is a normal CPU, the other is a GPU.
ie, there's nothing that says we won't have a GPU that's being driven by
an ARM or PPC. What I want to avoid is GPU-isms getting sprinkled into
the x86 (or any other) backend.
The problem is we don't have any infrastructure in place for this kind
of situation. So we start off with a few hacks and hopefully we're able
to see some commonality and start to see how to handle the
multi-architecture target issues a bit better.
Jeff
