Dear all,
I just want to let you know that we just published the final version of the
Vector Function ABI specification. The call-clobbered and call-preserved lists
of register has been updated (see section 2.1) .
The document is located at the same address:
https://developer.arm.com/products/
On 05/31/2018 04:39 AM, Alan Hayward wrote:
> (Missed this thread initially due to incorrect email address)
Sorry. Good to hear your're still interested in figuring this out.
>
>> On 29 May 2018, at 11:05, Richard Sandiford
>> wrote:
>>
>> Jeff Law writes:
>>> Now that we're in stage1 I do wa
On 05/29/2018 04:05 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> Jeff Law writes:
>> Now that we're in stage1 I do want to revisit the CLOBBER_HIGH stuff.
>> When we left things I think we were trying to decide between
>> CLOBBER_HIGH and clobbering the appropriate subreg. The problem with
>> the latter is the
(Missed this thread initially due to incorrect email address)
> On 29 May 2018, at 11:05, Richard Sandiford
> wrote:
>
> Jeff Law writes:
>> Now that we're in stage1 I do want to revisit the CLOBBER_HIGH stuff.
>> When we left things I think we were trying to decide between
>> CLOBBER_HIGH and
Jeff Law writes:
> Now that we're in stage1 I do want to revisit the CLOBBER_HIGH stuff.
> When we left things I think we were trying to decide between
> CLOBBER_HIGH and clobbering the appropriate subreg. The problem with
> the latter is the dataflow we compute is inaccurate (overly pessimistic)
On 05/26/2018 04:09 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> Steve Ellcey writes:
>> On Wed, 2018-05-16 at 22:11 +0100, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>>>
>>> TARGET_HARD_REGNO_CALL_PART_CLOBBERED is the only current way
>>> of saying that an rtl instruction preserves the low part of a
>>> register but clobbers
On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 11:09:24AM +0100, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> On the wider point about changing the way call clobber information
> is represented: I agree it would be good to generalise what we have
> now. But if possible I think we should avoid target hooks that take
> a specific call, and
Steve Ellcey writes:
> On Wed, 2018-05-16 at 22:11 +0100, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>>
>> TARGET_HARD_REGNO_CALL_PART_CLOBBERED is the only current way
>> of saying that an rtl instruction preserves the low part of a
>> register but clobbers the high part. We would need something like
>> Alan H's
On Wed, 2018-05-16 at 22:11 +0100, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>
> TARGET_HARD_REGNO_CALL_PART_CLOBBERED is the only current way
> of saying that an rtl instruction preserves the low part of a
> register but clobbers the high part. We would need something like
> Alan H's CLOBBER_HIGH patches to do i
Steve Ellcey writes:
> On Wed, 2018-05-16 at 17:30 +0100, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
>> On 16/05/18 17:21, Steve Ellcey wrote:
>> >
>> > It doesn't look like GCC has any existing mechanism for having different
>> > sets of caller saved/callee saved registers depending on the function
>> > at
On Wed, 2018-05-16 at 17:30 +0100, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
> On 16/05/18 17:21, Steve Ellcey wrote:
> >
> > It doesn't look like GCC has any existing mechanism for having different
> > sets of caller saved/callee saved registers depending on the function
> > attributes of the calling or ca
On 16/05/18 17:21, Steve Ellcey wrote:
> On Tue, 2018-05-15 at 18:29 +, Francesco Petrogalli wrote:
>
>> Hi Steve,
>>
>> I am happy to let you know that the Vector Function ABI for AArch64
>> is now public and available via the link at [1].
>>
>> Don’t hesitate to contact me in case you have a
On Tue, 2018-05-15 at 18:29 +, Francesco Petrogalli wrote:
> Hi Steve,
>
> I am happy to let you know that the Vector Function ABI for AArch64
> is now public and available via the link at [1].
>
> Don’t hesitate to contact me in case you have any questions.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Francesco
> On Feb 9, 2018, at 3:47 PM, Steve Ellcey wrote:
>
> […]
> I was wondering if the function vector ABI has been published yet and
> if so, where I could find it.
>
Hi Steve,
I am happy to let you know that the Vector Function ABI for AArch64 is now
public and available via the link at [1].
James,
This is a follow-up to https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2017-03/msg00109.html
where you said:
| Hi Ashwin,
|
| Thanks for the question. ARM has defined a vector function ABI, based
| on the Vector Function ABI Specification you linked below, which
| is designed to be suitable for both the Adva
On Friday 17 March 2017 07:31 PM, James Greenhalgh wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 09:50:18AM +, Sekhar, Ashwin wrote:
>> Hi GCC Team, Aarch64 Maintainers,
>>
>>
>> The rules in Vector Function Application Binary Interface Specification for
>> OpenMP
>> (https://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/libm
On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 09:50:18AM +, Sekhar, Ashwin wrote:
> Hi GCC Team, Aarch64 Maintainers,
>
>
> The rules in Vector Function Application Binary Interface Specification for
> OpenMP
> (https://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/libmvec?action=AttachFile&do=view&target=VectorABI.txt)
> is used in
nction Application Binary Interface Specification for OpenMP
1. Vector Function ABI Overview
Aarch64 Vector Function ABI provides ABI for the vector functions generated by
compiler supporting SIMD constructs of OpenMP
18 matches
Mail list logo
