On 26/06/17 17:01, Thomas Preudhomme wrote:
On 26/06/17 15:16, Christophe Lyon wrote:
You mean the macro is expected not to be defined on ARMv8-A ?
Correct. Most instructions its value represent are not available on ARMv8-A and
for those that are the intrinsics are deprecated.
I've jus
On 26/06/17 15:16, Christophe Lyon wrote:
On 26 June 2017 at 16:09, Thomas Preudhomme
wrote:
Hi Christophe,
On 21/06/17 17:57, Christophe Lyon wrote:
Hi,
On 19 June 2017 at 11:32, Richard Earnshaw (lists)
wrote:
On 16/06/17 15:56, Prakhar Bahuguna wrote:
On 16/06/2017 15:37:18, Ric
On 26 June 2017 at 16:09, Thomas Preudhomme
wrote:
> Hi Christophe,
>
>
> On 21/06/17 17:57, Christophe Lyon wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>>
>> On 19 June 2017 at 11:32, Richard Earnshaw (lists)
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 16/06/17 15:56, Prakhar Bahuguna wrote:
On 16/06/2017 15:37:18, Richard Earnshaw
Hi Christophe,
On 21/06/17 17:57, Christophe Lyon wrote:
Hi,
On 19 June 2017 at 11:32, Richard Earnshaw (lists)
wrote:
On 16/06/17 15:56, Prakhar Bahuguna wrote:
On 16/06/2017 15:37:18, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
On 16/06/17 08:48, Prakhar Bahuguna wrote:
On 15/06/2017 17:23:43, Rich
ping?
On 21 June 2017 at 18:57, Christophe Lyon wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> On 19 June 2017 at 11:32, Richard Earnshaw (lists)
> wrote:
>> On 16/06/17 15:56, Prakhar Bahuguna wrote:
>>> On 16/06/2017 15:37:18, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
On 16/06/17 08:48, Prakhar Bahuguna wrote:
> On 15/06/
Hi,
On 19 June 2017 at 11:32, Richard Earnshaw (lists)
wrote:
> On 16/06/17 15:56, Prakhar Bahuguna wrote:
>> On 16/06/2017 15:37:18, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
>>> On 16/06/17 08:48, Prakhar Bahuguna wrote:
On 15/06/2017 17:23:43, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
> On 14/06/17 10:3
Hi,
On 19 June 2017 at 11:32, Richard Earnshaw (lists)
wrote:
> On 16/06/17 15:56, Prakhar Bahuguna wrote:
>> On 16/06/2017 15:37:18, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
>>> On 16/06/17 08:48, Prakhar Bahuguna wrote:
On 15/06/2017 17:23:43, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
> On 14/06/17 10:3
On 16/06/17 15:56, Prakhar Bahuguna wrote:
> On 16/06/2017 15:37:18, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
>> On 16/06/17 08:48, Prakhar Bahuguna wrote:
>>> On 15/06/2017 17:23:43, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
On 14/06/17 10:35, Prakhar Bahuguna wrote:
> The ARM ACLE defines the __ARM_FEATURE
On 16/06/2017 15:37:18, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
> On 16/06/17 08:48, Prakhar Bahuguna wrote:
> > On 15/06/2017 17:23:43, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
> >> On 14/06/17 10:35, Prakhar Bahuguna wrote:
> >>> The ARM ACLE defines the __ARM_FEATURE_COPROC macro which indicates which
> >>> copr
On 16/06/17 08:48, Prakhar Bahuguna wrote:
> On 15/06/2017 17:23:43, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
>> On 14/06/17 10:35, Prakhar Bahuguna wrote:
>>> The ARM ACLE defines the __ARM_FEATURE_COPROC macro which indicates which
>>> coprocessor intrinsics are available for the target. If
>>> __ARM_FEA
Patch updated with code style fixes.
--
Prakhar Bahuguna
>From f1d76a6309a1fe16711b800507938eaa4f78852e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Prakhar Bahuguna
Date: Tue, 2 May 2017 13:43:40 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] Implement __ARM_FEATURE_COPROC coprocessor intrinsic feature
macro
---
gcc/config/arm/
On 15/06/2017 17:23:43, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
> On 14/06/17 10:35, Prakhar Bahuguna wrote:
> > The ARM ACLE defines the __ARM_FEATURE_COPROC macro which indicates which
> > coprocessor intrinsics are available for the target. If
> > __ARM_FEATURE_COPROC is
> > undefined, the target does
On 14/06/17 10:35, Prakhar Bahuguna wrote:
> The ARM ACLE defines the __ARM_FEATURE_COPROC macro which indicates which
> coprocessor intrinsics are available for the target. If __ARM_FEATURE_COPROC
> is
> undefined, the target does not support coprocessor intrinsics. The feature
> levels are defin
13 matches
Mail list logo
