On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 9:45 AM, Richard Guenther
wrote:
> On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 3:45 PM, Kai Tietz wrote:
>> 2011/5/4 Richard Guenther :
>>> On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 10:17 AM, Andreas Krebbel
>>> wrote:
Hi,
the attached patch uses the existing promote_function_mode hook. For
On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 3:45 PM, Kai Tietz wrote:
> 2011/5/4 Richard Guenther :
>> On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 10:17 AM, Andreas Krebbel
>> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> the attached patch uses the existing promote_function_mode hook. For
>>> a libcall neither TYPE nor FNTYPE is available so I had to change
2011/5/4 Richard Guenther :
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 10:17 AM, Andreas Krebbel
> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> the attached patch uses the existing promote_function_mode hook. For
>> a libcall neither TYPE nor FNTYPE is available so I had to change a
>> few related function in order to deal with that.
>>
On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 10:17 AM, Andreas Krebbel
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> the attached patch uses the existing promote_function_mode hook. For
> a libcall neither TYPE nor FNTYPE is available so I had to change a
> few related function in order to deal with that.
>
> The patch also fixes the s390 DFP pr
"Andreas Krebbel" writes:
> 2011-04-18 Andreas Krebbel
>
> * calls.c (emit_library_call_value_1): Invoke
> promote_function_mode hook on libcall arguments.
> * explow.c (promote_function_mode, promote_mode): Handle TYPE
> argument being NULL.
> * targhooks.c (defa
Hi,
the attached patch uses the existing promote_function_mode hook. For
a libcall neither TYPE nor FNTYPE is available so I had to change a
few related function in order to deal with that.
The patch also fixes the s390 DFP problems.
Bye,
-Andreas-
2011-04-18 Andreas Krebbel
* ca
Andreas Krebbel writes:
> On 04/13/2011 03:31 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>> "Andreas Krebbel" writes:
>>
>>> This fixes a wrong code generation bug for sw DFP:
>>>
>>> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-03/msg00141.html
>>
>> Why do we need a new target hook just for libcalls? Why not ju
On 04/13/2011 03:31 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> "Andreas Krebbel" writes:
>
>> This fixes a wrong code generation bug for sw DFP:
>>
>> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-03/msg00141.html
>
> Why do we need a new target hook just for libcalls? Why not just use
> the existing TARGET_PROMOT
"Andreas Krebbel" writes:
> This fixes a wrong code generation bug for sw DFP:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-03/msg00141.html
Why do we need a new target hook just for libcalls? Why not just use
the existing TARGET_PROMOTE_FUNCTION_MODE hook? We could say that for a
libcall functy
This fixes a wrong code generation bug for sw DFP:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-03/msg00141.html
Bye,
-Andreas-
This fixes a wrong code generation bug for sw DFP:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-03/msg00141.html
Bye,
-Andreas-
11 matches
Mail list logo