Re: Housekeeping work in backends.html

> Perhaps 'd' should just go away completely. It was intended to > distinguish between ports using the old scheduler description and > ports using the DFA model. Applied. -- Eric BotcazouIndex: backends.html === RCS file: /cvs/gcc/w

Re: Housekeeping work in backends.html

> Perhaps 'd' should just go away completely. It was intended to > distinguish between ports using the old scheduler description and > ports using the DFA model. But support for the old scheduler > description was removed some 10 years ago, and AFAIR the targets that > don't use the DFA scheduler d

Re: Housekeeping work in backends.html

On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 9:42 AM, Eric Botcazou wrote: >> the attached patch removes obsolete ports (c4x, m68hc11 and ms1), toggles >> the 'p' letter and adjust accordingly (only avr, fr30, m68k, mcore, rs6000 >> and sh still use define_peephole) and removes trailing spaces. > > Same treatment for th

Re: Housekeeping work in backends.html

> the attached patch removes obsolete ports (c4x, m68hc11 and ms1), toggles > the 'p' letter and adjust accordingly (only avr, fr30, m68k, mcore, rs6000 > and sh still use define_peephole) and removes trailing spaces. Same treatment for the 'b' letter, the ports that uses '"* ..."' notation for o

Re: Housekeeping work in backends.html

> For the moxie, nvptx, rl178 and rx ports, maintainers can send me the string > as Sandra did for the nios2 port and I'll update the document. DJ kindly sent them for both ports so I have installed them. -- Eric BotcazouIndex: backends.html ==

Re: Housekeeping work in backends.html

> I think I got this right > >| Characteristics > > Target | HMSLQNFICBD lqrcpfgmbdiates > ---+ > moxie | F g ds Thanks, applied, but I think that 't' could be added because AFAICS every insn (not expander) g

Re: Housekeeping work in backends.html

Eric Botcazou writes: > Some ports are missing (lm32, moxie, nios2, nvptx, rl78, rx) so the relevant > maintainers are CCed (see 6.3.9 Anatomy of a Target Back End in the doc). I think I got this right | Characteristics Target | HMSLQNFICBD lqrcpfgmbdiates ---+-

Re: Housekeeping work in backends.html

> H - you could argue a hardware implementation does not exist as it's a > virtual target, but it can obviously be compiled down to run on > hardware that does exist. Agreed. > Q - "registers" are typed and you can declare 64 bit registers, so > probably this is true OK. > f - No

Re: Housekeeping work in backends.html

On 01/07/2015 12:39 AM, Eric Botcazou wrote: Some ports are missing (lm32, moxie, nios2, nvptx, rl78, rx) so the relevant maintainers are CCed (see 6.3.9 Anatomy of a Target Back End in the doc). The page is directly browsable at https://gcc.gnu.org/backends.html For the moxie, nvptx, rl178 an

Re: Housekeeping work in backends.html

> the attached patch removes obsolete ports (c4x, m68hc11 and ms1), toggles > the 'p' letter and adjust accordingly (only avr, fr30, m68k, mcore, rs6000 > and sh still use define_peephole) and removes trailing spaces. This replaces 'a' with 'i' for multiple inheritance thunks and reuses 'a' for L

Re: Housekeeping work in backends.html

> the attached patch removes obsolete ports (c4x, m68hc11 and ms1), toggles > the 'p' letter and adjust accordingly (only avr, fr30, m68k, mcore, rs6000 > and sh still use define_peephole) and removes trailing spaces. Same treatment for the 'd' letter, the ports that do not use DFA scheduler desc

Re: Housekeeping work in backends.html

> Xtensa is now supported by the QEMU, so probably question mark in its 'S' > slot may be removed. Done, thanks. -- Eric Botcazou

Re: Housekeeping work in backends.html

Hi Eric, On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 2:39 AM, Eric Botcazou wrote: > The page is directly browsable at https://gcc.gnu.org/backends.html > > For the moxie, nvptx, rl178 and rx ports, maintainers can send me the string > as Sandra did for the nios2 port and I'll update the document. Xtensa is now supp

Re: Housekeeping work in backends.html

> Some ports are missing (lm32, moxie, nios2, nvptx, rl78, rx) so the relevant > maintainers are CCed (see 6.3.9 Anatomy of a Target Back End in the doc). The page is directly browsable at https://gcc.gnu.org/backends.html For the moxie, nvptx, rl178 and rx ports, maintainers can send me the stri

Re: Housekeeping work in backends.html

> I think that for nios2 the correct entry is probably "SCpd", but the > descriptions of some of the things in the table are too terse for me to > be 100% sure that's correct. E.g., the nios2 architecture doesn't > include the concept of "condition codes" at all, so how many registers > they might

Re: Housekeeping work in backends.html

> I might claim updating this shouldn't ever require a review :-) OK, it was mainly about toggling the 'p' letter... I have installed the attached patch for lm32 (based on info privately provided by Sébastien) and visium. -- Eric BotcazouIndex: backends.html ===

Re: Housekeeping work in backends.html

On 01/05/2015 04:15 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote: Hi, the attached patch removes obsolete ports (c4x, m68hc11 and ms1), toggles the 'p' letter and adjust accordingly (only avr, fr30, m68k, mcore, rs6000 and sh still use define_peephole) and removes trailing spaces. OK to commit? Some ports are miss

Re: Housekeeping work in backends.html

On 01/05/15 16:15, Eric Botcazou wrote: Hi, the attached patch removes obsolete ports (c4x, m68hc11 and ms1), toggles the 'p' letter and adjust accordingly (only avr, fr30, m68k, mcore, rs6000 and sh still use define_peephole) and removes trailing spaces. OK to commit? Some ports are missing (

Housekeeping work in backends.html

Hi, the attached patch removes obsolete ports (c4x, m68hc11 and ms1), toggles the 'p' letter and adjust accordingly (only avr, fr30, m68k, mcore, rs6000 and sh still use define_peephole) and removes trailing spaces. OK to commit? Some ports are missing (lm32, moxie, nios2, nvptx, rl78, rx) so