On 25/01/17 17:24, Joel Sherrill wrote:
I had another thought that we need to be sure that the
reason for adjusting the starting FP context pointer
to not be the base address of the FP context area
should be clear.
For architectures where you are just linearly saving the FPU
registers, it is j
I had another thought that we need to be sure that the
reason for adjusting the starting FP context pointer
to not be the base address of the FP context area
should be clear.
For architectures where you are just linearly saving the FPU
registers, it is just a normal structure.
For architectures l
On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 10:13 AM, Gedare Bloom wrote:
> I guess the CPU Supplement must be updated too.
>
>
>
Equally likely to impact the porting guide as well.
--joel
>
> On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 8:35 AM, Sebastian Huber
> wrote:
> > Since the FP area pointer is passed by reference in
> > _C
I guess the CPU Supplement must be updated too.
On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 8:35 AM, Sebastian Huber
wrote:
> Since the FP area pointer is passed by reference in
> _CPU_Context_Initialize_fp() the optional FP area adjustment via
> _CPU_Context_Fp_start() is superfluous. It is also wrong with respe
Since the FP area pointer is passed by reference in
_CPU_Context_Initialize_fp() the optional FP area adjustment via
_CPU_Context_Fp_start() is superfluous. It is also wrong with respect
to memory management, e.g. pointer passed to _Workspace_Free() may be
not the one returned by _Workspace_Alloca
