Re: [RFC] Target-specific limits on vector alignment

2012-07-25 Thread Hans-Peter Nilsson
> From: Ulrich Weigand > Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2012 19:38:15 +0200 > > > I've implemented this as a separate hook, rather than using the existing > > > hooks because there's a strong likelihood of breaking some existing ABIs > > > if I did it another way. > > > > > > There are a couple of tests that

Re: [RFC] Target-specific limits on vector alignment

2012-07-24 Thread Ulrich Weigand
Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > > From: Richard Earnshaw > > Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2012 15:16:50 +0200 > > > The ARM ABI states that vectors larger than 64 bits in size still have > > 64-bit alignment; never-the-less, the HW supports alignment hints of up > > to 128-bits in some cases and will trap in a

Re: [RFC] Target-specific limits on vector alignment

2012-06-11 Thread Hans-Peter Nilsson
> From: Richard Earnshaw > Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2012 15:16:50 +0200 > The ARM ABI states that vectors larger than 64 bits in size still have > 64-bit alignment; never-the-less, the HW supports alignment hints of up > to 128-bits in some cases and will trap in a vector has an alignment > that less th

Re: [RFC] Target-specific limits on vector alignment

2012-06-11 Thread Richard Guenther
On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 5:25 PM, Richard Earnshaw wrote: > On 11/06/12 15:53, Richard Guenther wrote: >> On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 4:38 PM, Richard Earnshaw wrote: >>> On 11/06/12 15:17, Richard Guenther wrote: On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 3:16 PM, Richard Earnshaw wrote: > The ARM ABI states

Re: [RFC] Target-specific limits on vector alignment

2012-06-11 Thread Richard Earnshaw
On 11/06/12 15:53, Richard Guenther wrote: > On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 4:38 PM, Richard Earnshaw wrote: >> On 11/06/12 15:17, Richard Guenther wrote: >>> On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 3:16 PM, Richard Earnshaw wrote: The ARM ABI states that vectors larger than 64 bits in size still have 64-bit

Re: [RFC] Target-specific limits on vector alignment

2012-06-11 Thread Richard Guenther
On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 4:38 PM, Richard Earnshaw wrote: > On 11/06/12 15:17, Richard Guenther wrote: >> On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 3:16 PM, Richard Earnshaw wrote: >>> The ARM ABI states that vectors larger than 64 bits in size still have >>> 64-bit alignment; never-the-less, the HW supports alignm

Re: [RFC] Target-specific limits on vector alignment

2012-06-11 Thread Richard Earnshaw
On 11/06/12 15:17, Richard Guenther wrote: > On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 3:16 PM, Richard Earnshaw wrote: >> The ARM ABI states that vectors larger than 64 bits in size still have >> 64-bit alignment; never-the-less, the HW supports alignment hints of up >> to 128-bits in some cases and will trap in a

Re: [RFC] Target-specific limits on vector alignment

2012-06-11 Thread Richard Guenther
On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 3:16 PM, Richard Earnshaw wrote: > The ARM ABI states that vectors larger than 64 bits in size still have > 64-bit alignment; never-the-less, the HW supports alignment hints of up > to 128-bits in some cases and will trap in a vector has an alignment > that less than the hi