>
> Where does mips link.h come from? I didn't see it in AOSP
> Bionic C library.
>
> --
> H.J.
>
It's from development/ndk/platforms/android-9/arch-mips/include/link.h from
AOSP checkout.
Regards,
Chao-ying
> Hi,
>
> Bionic C library doesn't provide link.h. This patch reverts revision
> 186788:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2012-04/msg00740.html
>
> OK to install?
>
> Thanks.
>
> H.J.
> ---
> 2012-08-09 H.J. Lu
>
> PR bootstrap/54209
> * unwind-dw2-fde-dip.c (USE_PT_GNU_EH_FR
> > Hi,
> >
> > Bionic C library doesn't provide link.h. This patch
> reverts revision
> > 186788:
> >
> > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2012-04/msg00740.html
> >
> > OK to install?
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > H.J.
> > ---
> > 2012-08-09 H.J. Lu
> >
> > PR bootstrap/54209
> > * unwin
Richard Sandiford wrote:
> > Index: gcc/config/mips/gnu-user.h
> > ===
> > --- gcc/config/mips/gnu-user.h (revision 186580)
> > +++ gcc/config/mips/gnu-user.h (working copy)
> > @@ -45,8 +45,10 @@
> > /* A standard GNU/Linu
Hi Maxim, Richard,
I built cross-toolchains for 3 different targets as follows.
1. mips-linux-gnu
2. mips-linux-gnu --enable-targets=all
3. mips64-linux-gnu
These targets are affected by this MIPS Android patch.
Then, I checked the output from "gcc -dumpspecs" before and after applying
th
Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote:
> >
> >> For now, two MIPS changes in gnu-user.h and
> unwind-dw2-fde-dip.c can be posted for comment.
> >> (I didn't tested this patch, though.)
>
> You need to test your patches before posting them for review.
> Below are a couple of comments on your current version.
Liu [pro...@gmail.com] wrote:
> OK, I get.
> But, sorry, my mips64dspr2 patch has be done...
> Should I summit it?
I just wonder what version of the MIPS64 DSP/DSPr2 spec that you implemented.
Do you have a target CPU that has these MIPS64 DSP/DSPr2 instructions? My
concern is that the late
Richard Sandiford [rdsandif...@googlemail.com] wrote:
> This pattern maps directly to __builtin_mips_prepend, which is defined
> to take and return an SI type, so :SI is the correct choice here.
>
> I agree it might be nice to have a function that operates on 64-bit
> values for 64-bit targets tho
