On Mon, 11 Sep 2006, Edmar Wienskoski wrote:
> There are 2 issues here:
> First, It is libgcc that is generating undefined references to __*tf*
> functions. If gcc can provide them with "softfp_float_modes := sf df tf", I
> think is reasonable to do that. For completeness sake you can do as you
>
> Edmar Wienskoski writes:
Edmar> Second, is the long double ABI problem. In the past gcc always generated
function calls to _q_* functions. (Per ABI Chapter 5)
Edmar> For this code:
Edmar> long double foo (long double x, long double y){ return x + y; }
Edmar> gcc-4.0, target powerpc-eabise a
Joseph S. Myers wrote:
On Fri, 8 Sep 2006, Edmar Wienskoski wrote:
Ok. I am starting to see the whole picture now.
So the whole thing appears to work with --disable-shared, just because the way
the linker
loads symbols in presence of libgcc_s.so versus libgcc.a.
Follow up question:
The e50
On Fri, 8 Sep 2006, Edmar Wienskoski wrote:
> Ok. I am starting to see the whole picture now.
> So the whole thing appears to work with --disable-shared, just because the way
> the linker
> loads symbols in presence of libgcc_s.so versus libgcc.a.
>
> Follow up question:
> The e500 abi actualy de
Ok. I am starting to see the whole picture now.
So the whole thing appears to work with --disable-shared, just because
the way the linker
loads symbols in presence of libgcc_s.so versus libgcc.a.
Follow up question:
The e500 abi actualy defines long double to be 128bits floats.
On rs6000.c, rs6
On Fri, 8 Sep 2006, David Edelsohn wrote:
> Soft-float implementation of long double support is in development
> but not complete. Long double requires double precision registers, so it
> only will work with e500 double. It also requires floating point
> multiply-subtract (fmsub), which e5
Soft-float implementation of long double support is in development
but not complete. Long double requires double precision registers, so it
only will work with e500 double. It also requires floating point
multiply-subtract (fmsub), which e500 double does not appear to
implement. This is
On Fri, 8 Sep 2006, Edmar Wienskoski wrote:
> So the key questions are:
> 1 - What should I expect in regards to __lttf2 (and similar symbols).
> (like, when they should be defined, referenced, and when not)
They should not be defined or used at all. IBM long double should use
__gcc_*, and IEEE
I am confused with gcc configuration, and I cannot determine if I have a bug
or if I am misconfiguring the compiler. Here is the situation:
gcc sources: 4.2 snapshot of 20060905
If compiler is configured with:
--target=powerpc-*-linux-gnualtivec
then I have the following libraries and everythin
