ostannard wrote:
I originally implemented it this way to avoid making two ABIs valid for one
target, but I agree that it would be confusing to have the ABI change
automatically. How about we use the `-mabi=` option as you suggest, with values
`aapcs` (already accepted by clang) and `aapcs-soft
ktkachov-arm wrote:
Changing the ABI through the architecture flags i.e. +nofp has potential to
greatly confuse users, who may come from other architectures that have
soft-float ABIs already (including 32-bit arm)
- Does this also happen when using +nosimd?
- What about users like the Linux ke
ostannard wrote:
> I'm a little surprised we don't need any LLVM backend changes, but I guess in
> soft-float mode we basically treat floats as ints anyway, so maybe things
> just work. I'd like to see appropriate regression tests, though (if they
> don't already exist).
Yes, the backend alre
@@ -534,7 +540,8 @@ Address AArch64ABIInfo::EmitAAPCSVAArg(Address VAListAddr,
QualType Ty,
BaseTy = ArrTy->getElementType();
NumRegs = ArrTy->getNumElements();
}
- bool IsFPR = BaseTy->isFloatingPointTy() || BaseTy->isVectorTy();
+ bool IsFPR = Kind == AArch64ABIK
https://github.com/ostannard updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/74460
>From 316854b6558811aaa03b9f96be1849e0426f8aac Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Oliver Stannard
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2023 10:06:57 +
Subject: [PATCH 1/6] [AArch64] Split feature tests for FP and SIMD
AArch64Targ
@@ -534,7 +540,8 @@ Address AArch64ABIInfo::EmitAAPCSVAArg(Address VAListAddr,
QualType Ty,
BaseTy = ArrTy->getElementType();
NumRegs = ArrTy->getNumElements();
}
- bool IsFPR = BaseTy->isFloatingPointTy() || BaseTy->isVectorTy();
+ bool IsFPR = Kind == AArch64ABIK
efriedma-quic wrote:
I'm a little surprised we don't need any LLVM backend changes, but I guess in
soft-float mode we basically treat floats as ints anyway, so maybe things just
work. I'd like to see appropriate regression tests, though (if they don't
already exist).
https://github.com/llvm/
DavidSpickett wrote:
That makes sense. Didn't realise we had an `fp` flag, I don't see it in
`llvm/include/llvm/TargetParser/AArch64TargetParser.h`.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/74460
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.o
ostannard wrote:
This doesn't add any new options, and I'd like to avoid that if possible,
instead it is turned on by `-march=...+nofp`.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/74460
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://li
DavidSpickett wrote:
(maybe this is for a later patch but...)
Does this patch include the clang side options for the ABI or does
`-march=...+no-fp-armv8` already work for that?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/74460
___
cfe-commits mailing l
github-actions[bot] wrote:
:warning: C/C++ code formatter, clang-format found issues in your code.
:warning:
You can test this locally with the following command:
``bash
git-clang-format --diff ecf881838045985f381003cc27569c73a207d0cc
b68ed60a3fe78bc0e9f57b45bed9dd78ed851904 --
llvmbot wrote:
@llvm/pr-subscribers-clang-codegen
Author: None (ostannard)
Changes
This adds support for the AArch64 soft-float ABI. The specification for this
ABI is currently in review at https://github.com/ARM-software/abi-aa/pull/232,
and I won't commit this until that PR is merged.
https://github.com/ostannard created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/74460
This adds support for the AArch64 soft-float ABI. The specification for this
ABI is currently in review at https://github.com/ARM-software/abi-aa/pull/232,
and I won't commit this until that PR is merged.
Bec
13 matches
Mail list logo
