Re: [RFC/PATCH] libgcc: sh: Use soft-fp for non-hosted SH3/SH4

2024-07-08 Thread Sébastien Michelland
Hi again! It shouldn't be needed to build GDB separately or to specify the -m32 flags. Not sure why you have to do that. It was in the document you sent, especially some warning about sh-elf-run not working on 64-bit hosts. Guess that's solved by now. I've just tried the following configur

Re: [RFC/PATCH] libgcc: sh: Use soft-fp for non-hosted SH3/SH4

2024-07-07 Thread Sébastien Michelland
Hi! The default sh-elf configuration has no multi-libs for SH3 and SH4 variants without FPU (from what I can see). So it won't use soft-fp so much during sim testing. So please change to soft-fp for sh*, not just SH3/SH4. Got it, done that locally, and will update patch once tested. Here's

Re: [RFC/PATCH] libgcc: sh: Use soft-fp for non-hosted SH3/SH4

2024-07-05 Thread Sébastien Michelland
Hi Oleg! I don't understand why this is being limited to SH3 and SH4 only? Almost all SH4 systems out there have an FPU (unless special configurations are used). So I'd say if switching to soft-fp, then for SH-anything, not just SH3/SH4. If it yields some improvements for some users, I'm all f

Re: [RFC/PATCH] libgcc: sh: Use soft-fp for non-hosted SH3/SH4

2024-07-03 Thread Sébastien Michelland
On 2024-07-03 17:59, Jeff Law wrote: On 7/3/24 3:59 AM, Sébastien Michelland wrote: libgcc's fp-bit.c is quite slow and most modern/developed architectures have switched to using the soft-fp library. This patch does so for free-standing/unknown-OS SH3/SH4 builds, using soft-fp'

[RFC/PATCH] libgcc: sh: Use soft-fp for non-hosted SH3/SH4

2024-07-03 Thread Sébastien Michelland
an run that in my non-hosted environment. Any advice? Cheers, Sébastien libgcc/ChangeLog: * config.host: Use soft-fp library for non-hosted SH3/SH4 instead of fpdbit. * config/sh/sfp-machine.h: New. Signed-off-by: Sébastien Michelland --- libgcc/config.host | 1