On Thu, 31 May 2018 07:23:22 PDT (-0700), matthew.fort...@mips.com wrote:
Palmer Dabbelt writes:
On Tue, 29 May 2018 11:02:58 PDT (-0700), Jim Wilson wrote:
> On 05/26/2018 06:04 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
>> Why is the default multilib and a variant identical?
>
> This is supposed to be a sing
On 01/06/18 10:23, Michael Clark wrote:
On 1/06/2018, at 6:16 PM, Sebastian Huber
wrote:
On 29/05/18 20:02, Jim Wilson wrote:
Most variants include the C extension. Would it be possible to add -march=rv32g
and -march=rv64g variants?
The expectation is that most implementations will inc
> On 1/06/2018, at 6:16 PM, Sebastian Huber
> wrote:
>
> On 29/05/18 20:02, Jim Wilson wrote:
>>> Most variants include the C extension. Would it be possible to add
>>> -march=rv32g and -march=rv64g variants?
>>
>> The expectation is that most implementations will include the C extension.
On 31/05/18 11:08, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
On Tue, 29 May 2018 11:02:58 PDT (-0700), Jim Wilson wrote:
On 05/26/2018 06:04 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
Why is the default multilib and a variant identical?
This is supposed to be a single multilib, with two names. We use
MULTILIB_REUSE to map the
On 29/05/18 20:02, Jim Wilson wrote:
Most variants include the C extension. Would it be possible to add
-march=rv32g and -march=rv64g variants?
The expectation is that most implementations will include the C
extension. It reduces code size, improves performance, and I think I
read somewhere
On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 7:23 AM, Matthew Fortune
wrote:
> I do actually have a solution for this but it is not submitted upstream.
> MIPS has basically the same set of problems that RISC-V does in this area
> and in an ideal world there would be no 'fallback' multilib such that if
> you use compil
Palmer Dabbelt writes:
> On Tue, 29 May 2018 11:02:58 PDT (-0700), Jim Wilson wrote:
> > On 05/26/2018 06:04 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> >> Why is the default multilib and a variant identical?
> >
> > This is supposed to be a single multilib, with two names. We use
> > MULTILIB_REUSE to map the
On Tue, 29 May 2018 11:02:58 PDT (-0700), Jim Wilson wrote:
On 05/26/2018 06:04 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
Why is the default multilib and a variant identical?
This is supposed to be a single multilib, with two names. We use
MULTILIB_REUSE to map the two names to a single multilib.
rohan:103
On 05/26/2018 06:04 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
Why is the default multilib and a variant identical?
This is supposed to be a single multilib, with two names. We use
MULTILIB_REUSE to map the two names to a single multilib.
rohan:1030$ ./xgcc -B./ -march=rv64imafdc -mabi=lp64d --print-libgcc
Hello,
I built a riscv64-rtems5 GCC (it uses gcc/config/riscv/t-elf-multilib). The
following multilibs are built:
riscv64-rtems5-gcc -print-multi-lib
.;
rv32i/ilp32;@march=rv32i@mabi=ilp32
rv32im/ilp32;@march=rv32im@mabi=ilp32
rv32iac/ilp32;@march=rv32iac@mabi=ilp32
rv32imac/ilp32;@march=rv32ima
10 matches
Mail list logo
