[Activity] March 7 - 18

2011-03-19 Thread Ramana Radhakrishnan

== GCC ==

* Started looking at performance regressions. Setting up builds with
EEMBC Denbench and other benchmarks.
* Looked at PR47719 in some detail this week.
* Set up environment on laptop . Fixed PR46788 in 4.6 branch and trunk.
* Discussions regarding armhf, how to maintain Linaro branches -
upstreaming patches etc.
* Looked at a case of performance improvements with VFP stores. I think
it's because we end up allowing PRE_INC and POST_DEC for floating point
mode values because of which there end up being more transfers to and
from the integer core registers.
* Off sick on Monday 14th March 2011.

== Misc ==

* Sorted out travel arrangements for LDS. Waiting for visa now.

___
linaro-toolchain mailing list
linaro-toolchain@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-toolchain


Substituting -msoft-float/-mfloat-abi=* in the proper order in spec file

2011-03-19 Thread Loïc Minier
Hey

 I'm trying to extend the *link: specs to pass a different
 -dynamic-linker depending on the float ABI.  But I didn't manage to
 build a construct which would preserve the order of the flags; if I do
 something like:
%{msoft-float:-dynamic-linker V1} %{mfloat-abi=softfp:-dynamic-linker V2}

 Then I get V2 for "-mfloat-abi=softfp -msoft-float" instead of V1.

 In gcc/gcc.c I found some docs on spec file syntax; I see one can use
 %{S*&T*} and %{S*:X}, but apparently %{S*&T*:X} isn't allowed, so I
 can't manipulate the value.  I tried to use
%{msoft-float*:-dynamic-linker V1} %{mfloat-abi=softfp*:-dynamic-linker V2}
 but that gives the same effect (the msoft-float flags are
 grouped together in the original order and put first, then the
 mfloat-abi=softfp are grouped together in the original order and put
 second).

 I didn't manage to get %{msoft-float*:%http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-toolchain