[Patch, GCC/ARM] Redefine the ASM_APP_OFF in a cleaner way

y 2014-02-25 Terry Guo * config/arm/arm.h (ASM_APP_OFF): Re-define it in a cleaner way.From fd607bf3a164e885a6e16a1028feff11b8a653bc Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Terry Guo Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2014 15:08:55 +0800 Subject: [PATCH] patch --- gcc/config/arm/arm.h | 3 +-- 1 file change

[Patch 1/2][ARM]Split insn type alu_reg into alu_sreg and alu_dsp_reg

alus_reg is renamed to alus_sreg in terms of consistence. This is the first patch of this series and intends to cover the files under gcc/config/arm. Tested with gcc regression, no new regressions. Is it ok to trunk? BR, Terry 2014-07-10 Terry Guo * config/arm/types.md (alu_reg): Replaced

[Patch 2/2][AArch64]Split insn type alu_reg into alu_sreg and alu_dsp_reg

Hi there, As the second and final patch in this series, it intends to update alu_reg and alus_reg types for AArch64 port. With this change, the gcc can be successfully built for AArch64. Is it OK to trunk? BR, Terry 2014-07-10 Terry Guo * config/aarch64/aarch64.md (*addsi3_aarch64

[PATCH,GCC/Thumb1] Correctly reset the variable after_arm_reorg for Thumb1 target

t in arm.h. In this way, the variable will be correctly reset and ready for being used for Thumb1 target in future. Tested with gcc regression test for Thumb1 target cortex-m0. No new regressions. Is it ok to trunk? BR, Terry 2014-03-17 Terry Guo * config/arm/arm.h (machine_functio

[PATCH, GCC/THUMB1] New define_insn_and_split pattern to enable optimizing out certain unnecessary uxtb instruction

K to trunk? BR, Terry 2014-03-17 Terry Guo * config/arm/arm.md (cstoresi_leu_thumb1): New define_insn_and_split pattern. (cstoresi4): Use above new pattern. diff --git a/gcc/config/arm/arm.md b/gcc/config/arm/arm.md index 2ddda02..905a5b8 100644 --- a/gcc/config/arm/arm.md

[Patch]Simplify SUBREG with operand whose target bits are cleared by AND operation

Hi there, When compile below case for ARM Thumb-2 target: long long int test (unsigned long long int a, unsigned int b) { return (a & 0x) * b; } I find the GCC function simplify_subreg fails to simplify rtx (subreg:SI (and:DI (reg/v:DI 115 [ a ]) (const_int 4294967295 [0x])) 4)

RE: [Patch]Simplify SUBREG with operand whose target bits are cleared by AND operation

> -Original Message- > From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches- > ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of Terry Guo > Sent: Friday, March 28, 2014 3:48 PM > To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org > Subject: [Patch]Simplify SUBREG with operand whose target bits are cleared

[Ping][Patch]Simplify SUBREG with operand whose target bits are cleared by AND operation

Hello Eric, Would you please review my patch at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-03/msg01582.html? Thanks. BR, Terry

[Patch, GCC/Thumb1] Improve 64bit constant load for Thumb1

: ldr r1, .L2+4 ldr r0, .L2 .L2: .word 1 .word 1 The attached patch intends to split 64bit load to take advantage of such chances. Tested with gcc regression test on cortex-m0. No new regressions. Is it ok to stage 1? BR, Terry gcc/ 2014-04-11 Terry Guo

[Ping][PATCH, GCC/THUMB1] New define_insn_and_split pattern to enable optimizing out certain unnecessary uxtb instruction

Hi there, Could you please review patch at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-03/msg00790.html? Thanks. BR, Terry > -Original Message- > From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches- > ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of Terry Guo > Sent: Monday, March 17, 2014 1

Re: [Patch]Simplify SUBREG with operand whose target bits are cleared by AND operation

On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 10:11 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote: >> I find the GCC function simplify_subreg fails to simplify rtx (subreg:SI >> (and:DI (reg/v:DI 115 [ a ]) (const_int 4294967295 [0x])) 4) to zero >> during the fwprop1 pass, considering the fact that the high 32-bit part of >> (a & 0x

[Ping][Patch, GCC/Thumb1] Improve 64bit constant load for Thumb1

Ping ... BR, Terry > -Original Message- > From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches- > ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of Terry Guo > Sent: Friday, April 11, 2014 3:36 PM > To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org > Cc: Richard Earnshaw; Ramana Radhakrishnan > Subjec

Re: [Patch]Simplify SUBREG with operand whose target bits are cleared by AND operation

On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 6:13 PM, Terry Guo wrote: > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 10:11 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote: >>> I find the GCC function simplify_subreg fails to simplify rtx (subreg:SI >>> (and:DI (reg/v:DI 115 [ a ]) (const_int 4294967295 [0x])) 4) to zero >&g

RE: [RFC] New feature to reuse one multilib among different targets

> -Original Message- > From: Joseph Myers [mailto:jos...@codesourcery.com] > Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2013 12:13 AM > To: Terry Guo > Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org > Subject: RE: [RFC] New feature to reuse one multilib among different targets > > On Fri, 7 D

[Patch, gcc, testsuite] Adjust optimization levels for some cases.

. Regression test is performed on arm-none-eabi target. No regression found. Is it OK to trunk? BR, Terry 2011-10-20 Terry Guo * gcc.target/arm/wmul-1.c: Adjust optimization levels. * gcc.target/arm/wmul-2.c: Ditto. * gcc.target/arm/wmul-3.c: Ditto. * gcc.target

[Patch ARM] Update the test case to differ movs and lsrs for ARM mode and non-ARM mode

Hi, Due to the impact of ARM UAL, the Thumb1 and Thumb2 mode use LSRS instruction while the ARM mode uses MOVS instruction. So the following case is updated accordingly. Is it OK to trunk? BR, Terry 2012-08-21 Terry Guo * gcc.target/arm/combine-movs.c: Check movs for ARM mode

RE: [Patch ARM] Update the test case to differ movs and lsrs for ARM mode and non-ARM mode

> > > > Due to the impact of ARM UAL, the Thumb1 and Thumb2 mode use LSRS > > instruction while the ARM mode uses MOVS instruction. So the > following case > > is updated accordingly. Is it OK to trunk? > > > > BR, > > Terry > > > > 2012-08

[Patch, test] Enable to prune warnings for tests defined in one exp file

The test-framework.exp is also enabled. No regression found. Is it OK to trunk? BR, Terry 2012-08-27 Terry Guo * lib/gcc-dg.exp (dg_runtest_extra_prunes): New variable to define rules that will be applied to all tests in a .exp file. (gcc-dg-prune): Include rules

RE: [Patch, test] Enable to prune warnings for tests defined in one exp file

> -Original Message- > From: Mike Stump [mailto:mikest...@comcast.net] > Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2012 1:21 AM > To: Terry Guo > Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Richard Guenther > Subject: Re: [Patch, test] Enable to prune warnings for tests defined > in one exp file >

RE: [Patch ARM] Update the test case to differ movs and lsrs for ARM mode and non-ARM mode

> -Original Message- > From: Richard Earnshaw > Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2012 10:00 PM > To: Terry Guo > Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org > Subject: Re: [Patch ARM] Update the test case to differ movs and lsrs > for ARM mode and non-ARM mode > > On 22/0

[Ping]RE: [Patch, test] Enable to prune warnings for tests defined in one exp file

Hi Mike, Is it ok to document this feature in README.gcc? Is it ok to back port this feature to 4.7 branch? Thanks. BR, Terry > -Original Message- > From: Terry Guo [mailto:terry@arm.com] > Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2012 10:45 AM > To: 'Mike Stump' > Cc

RE: [PATCH] Move Graphite from using PPL over to ISL

Hi Richard, What's the plan for 4.7 branch? Will you back port this patch to 4.7 and make it use ISL too? I am going to create a upstream GCC SVN branch from 4.7 for development on ARM embedded processors. If there will be some big changes for 4.7 in near future in terms of replacing PPL with ISL,

RE: [PATCH] Move Graphite from using PPL over to ISL

> -Original Message- > From: pins...@gmail.com [mailto:pins...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Andrew > Pinski > Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2012 2:58 PM > To: Terry Guo > Cc: Richard Guenther; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; tob...@grosser.es; > seb...@gmail.com; Michael Matz; D

RE: [PATCH] Move Graphite from using PPL over to ISL

> > Hi Tobi and Andrew, > > > > Thanks for your timely answers. I just saw Sebastian's comments: > > > > Yes, having GCC only depend on ISL and CLooG-ISL (and not depend > > anymore on PPL) is our plan for 4.7. > > > > from http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-08/msg01161.html. > > Yes but thos

[wwwdocs] Document ARM/embedded-x_y-branch family

Hi Gerald, As it becomes our long term goal to deliver arm-none-eabi tool chain based on GCC 4.6/4.7/4.8 and future branches, I am going to use the following pattern to document this branch family. Is it ok to commit? BR, Terry Index: htdocs/svn.html =

RE: [wwwdocs] Document ARM/embedded-x_y-branch family

> -Original Message- > From: Gerald Pfeifer [mailto:ger...@pfeifer.com] > Sent: Monday, July 16, 2012 8:10 AM > To: Terry Guo > Cc: Joey Ye; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org > Subject: Re: [wwwdocs] Document ARM/embedded-x_y-branch family > > Hi Terry, > > On Mo

Patch to enable --with-multilib-list for arm-none-eabi target

h-multilib-list. Tested on trunk for arm-none-eabi target. Is it ok to trunk? BR, Terry 2012-05-02 Terry Guo * config.gcc: Include more MULTILIB implementations for ARM EABI. * config/arm/t-mlibs: New file to define more MULTILIB implementations for A

RE: Propose to add a new argument MULTILIB_REQUIRED in multilib framework

Hi Joseph, > > On Tue, 17 Apr 2012, Terry Guo wrote: > > > 2012-04-17 Terry Guo > > > > * Makefile.in (s-mlib): Add new argument MULTILIB_REQUIRED. > > * genmultilib (MULTILIB_REQUIRED): New. > > You need to add documentation

RE: Propose to add a new argument MULTILIB_REQUIRED in multilib framework

Hi Joseph, > > On Thu, 3 May 2012, Terry Guo wrote: > > > Thanks for your reminding. > > The attached patch added the missing documentation. Please help to > review. > > Please send the complete new patch, including documentation, for review > (unless the rest

RE: Patch to enable --with-multilib-list for arm-none-eabi target

c.gnu.org] On Behalf Of Terry Guo > Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2012 1:49 PM > To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org > Subject: Patch to enable --with-multilib-list for arm-none-eabi target > > Hello, > > This patch provides a bunch of predefined MULTILIB for various arm- > none-eabi

RE: Propose to add a new argument MULTILIB_REQUIRED in multilib framework

> -Original Message- > From: Joseph Myers [mailto:jos...@codesourcery.com] > Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2012 8:49 PM > To: Terry Guo > Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org > Subject: RE: Propose to add a new argument MULTILIB_REQUIRED in > multilib framework > > On Thu,

[wwwdocs] Announce new ARM/embedded-4_6-branch branch

Hi, This new branch intends to provide fixes and enhancements for GCC 4.6 when used with ARM embedded cores. The attached patch adds documentation for this branch. Is it OK to commit? Thanks. BR, Terry svn-arm-embedded-4_6-branch.patch Description: Binary data

RE: [wwwdocs] Announce new ARM/embedded-4_6-branch branch

Hi Gerald, Thanks for your review. Here I attached the updated one. Is it ok to commit? BR, Terry > -Original Message- > From: Gerald Pfeifer [mailto:ger...@pfeifer.com] > Sent: Monday, August 08, 2011 5:43 PM > To: Terry Guo > Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Richard Ea

[PATCH, libstdc++-v3] Enable to cross-test libstdc++ on simulator.

n found. OK to commit? libstdc++-v3/ChangLog: 2011-08-11 Terry Guo * testsuite/Makefile.in (TEST_GCC_EXEC_PREFIX): New. diff --git a/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/Makefile.in b/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/Makefile.in index 37e8a3c..52c3431 100644 --- a/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/Makefile.in +++ b/libstd

RE: [wwwdocs] Announce new ARM/embedded-4_6-branch branch

Ping. BR, Terry > -Original Message- > From: Terry Guo [mailto:terry@arm.com] > Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2011 3:13 PM > To: 'Gerald Pfeifer' > Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Richard Earnshaw; Matthew Gretton-Dann > Subject: RE: [wwwdocs] Announce new AR

RE: [wwwdocs] Announce new ARM/embedded-4_6-branch branch

Hello Gerald, Could you please review my updated patch? BR, Terry > -Original Message- > From: Terry Guo [mailto:terry@arm.com] > Sent: Sunday, August 14, 2011 10:27 AM > To: 'Gerald Pfeifer' > Cc: 'gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org'; Richard Earnshaw;

RE: [wwwdocs] Announce new ARM/embedded-4_6-branch branch

Ping. BR, Terry > -Original Message- > From: Terry Guo [mailto:terry@arm.com] > Sent: Monday, August 15, 2011 4:07 PM > To: 'Gerald Pfeifer' > Cc: 'gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org'; Richard Earnshaw; Matthew Gretton-Dann > Subject: RE: [wwwdocs] Annou

[PATCH, testsuite] Avoid architecture options conflict for case pr42894.c

Hello, I think it is useful to run this case for newer arm targets. So the patch intends to skip the warning of architecture conflicts. Is it ok to commit to trunk? BR, Terry gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: 2011-08-25 Terry Guo * gcc.dg/tls/pr42894.c: Add dg-prune-output to skip

RE: [PATCH, testsuite] Avoid architecture options conflict for case pr42894.c

Ping. BR, Terry > -Original Message- > From: Terry Guo [mailto:terry@arm.com] > Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2011 7:46 PM > To: 'gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org' > Subject: [PATCH, testsuite] Avoid architecture options conflict for > case pr42894.c > > Hello

[Patch, testsuite] Skip case struct-layout-1 for targets using short enums.

e patch, is it OK to commit? Best regards, Terry 2011-08-31 Terry Guo * gcc.dg/compat/struct-layout-1_main.c: Skip the case if the target uses short enums. diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/compat/struct-layout-1_main.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/compat/struct-layout-1_main.c in

RE: [Patch, testsuite] Skip case struct-layout-1 for targets using short enums.

Hello Jakub, > > On Thu, Sep 01, 2011 at 09:34:20AM +0800, Terry Guo wrote: > > Here is the patch, is it OK to commit? > > Definitely not. > struct-layout-1* already has support for short enums, see > http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110247 &g

RE: [Patch, testsuite] Skip case struct-layout-1 for targets using short enums.

Hello Jakub, > > On Thu, Sep 01, 2011 at 02:32:51PM +0800, Terry Guo wrote: > > FAIL: gcc.dg/compat/struct-layout-1 c_compat_x_tst.o compile > > FAIL: gcc.dg/compat/struct-layout-1 c_compat_y_tst.o compile > > UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/compat/struct-layout-1 c_compat_x_t

RE: [Patch, testsuite] Skip case struct-layout-1 for targets using short enums.

Hello Jakub, > The files are there to test the infrastructure. I'd say just try > 2011-09-01 Jakub Jelinek > > * gcc.dg/compat/struct-layout-1_test.h: Decrease bitfield size > to work even with -fshort-enums. > > --- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/compat/struct-layout-1_test.h2008-

[arm-embedded] Backport r174965 from trunk to ARM/embedded-4_6-branch

Hi, The checkin at r174965 in trunk fixed vect-27.c failure for ARM EABI target. Detailed information please refer to http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-06/msg00927.html. Performed regression test on arm QEMU and no regression. OK to ARM/embedded-4_6-branch? BR, Terry 2011-09-05 Terry

[Patch, testsuite] Skip case ipa-sra-2.c for strict_align target.

cases, the SRA is stopped here. This patch intends to skip this case for target that set STRICT_ALIGNMENT to 1 otherwise the case will fail due to the SRA isn't performed actually. OK to commit to trunk? BR, Terry 2011-09-07 Terry Guo * gcc.dg/ipa/ipa-sra-2.c: Only run on

RE: [Patch, testsuite] Skip case ipa-sra-2.c for strict_align target.

Hello, > > Hm, the testcase looks like it should actually pass even for strict- > align > targets. Martin? > > Richard. > I debugged the GCC and observed the below situation. Here is the code snippet of this case: static int __attribute__((noinline)) ox (struct bovid *cow) { cow->red = cow

RE: [Patch, testsuite] Skip case ipa-sra-2.c for strict_align target.

Hello, > > > > Hm, the testcase looks like it should actually pass even for strict- > align > > targets. Martin? > > > > Well, tree_non_mode_aligned_mem_p clearly does not really work very > well and needs a more-or-less reimplementation, there has been a > discussion about this already in Augus

RE: [PATCH, testsuite] Avoid architecture options conflict for case pr42894.c

Hello, Is it ok to commit? BR, Terry > -Original Message- > From: Terry Guo [mailto:terry@arm.com] > Sent: Monday, August 29, 2011 9:40 AM > To: 'gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org' > Subject: RE: [PATCH, testsuite] Avoid architecture options conflict for > case

[Patch, testsuite, arm] Skip the arch conflict to enable case neon-thumb2-move pass on more targets.

Hello, This patch enables the case pass on targets other than armv7-a by skipping the architecture conflict message. Is it OK to trunk? BR, Terry 2011-09-09 Terry Guo * gcc.target/arm/neon-thumb2-move.c: Skip the architecture conflict to enable the case pass on

[Patch, gcc, testsuite] Use long enums for case foldconst-3.c for target ARM EABI.

Hello, This patch aims to disable short enums for arm eabi otherwise the case will fail to be compiled due to "width of 'code' exceeds its type". Is it OK to trunk? BR, Terry 2011-09-09 Terry Guo * gcc.dg/tree-ssa/foldconst-3.c: Use -fno-short-enums

[arm-embedded] Simply enable GCC to support -march=armv6s-m as GAS does.

ranch. BR, Terry 2011-09-08 Terry Guo * config/arm/arm.c (all_architectures): Simple support for option -march=armv6s-m. Index: gcc/config/arm/arm.c === --- gcc/config/arm/arm.c(revision 178753) +++ gcc/

[arm-embedded] Make GCC more easier for user to build extra libraries for ARM.

into ARM/embedded-4_6-branch. BR, Terry 2011-09-08 Terry Guo * config.gcc: Support --with-extra-multilibs option for ARM EABI. * configure.ac: Handle --with-extra-multilibs option. * configure: Add help message and support for that option. * doc/install.texi

[RFC][GCC, Multilib]Make GCC more easier for user to select and build extra libraries for ARM targets.

;. This patch has been in ARM/embedded-4_6-branch. Any comments for applying it on trunk? BR, Terry 2011-09-08 Terry Guo * config.gcc: Support --with-extra-multilibs option for ARM EABI. * configure.ac: Handle --with-extra-multilibs option. * configure: Add help messa

RE: [arm-embedded] Simply enable GCC to support -march=armv6s-m as GAS does.

rwise one has to use > option > > -mcpu=cortex-m0. Committed into ARM/embedded-4_6-branch. > > > > BR, > > Terry > > > > 2011-09-08 Terry Guo > > > >* config/arm/arm.c (all_architectures): Simple support for > >option -march=armv6s-m. > > > > > > Ok. > > R. Can I apply this patch to trunk and GCC 4.6 branch? BR, Terry

RE: [Patch, gcc, testsuite] Use long enums for case foldconst-3.c for target ARM EABI.

Ping. BR, Terry > -Original Message- > From: Terry Guo [mailto:terry@arm.com] > Sent: Sunday, September 11, 2011 9:39 AM > To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org > Cc: r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de > Subject: [Patch, gcc, testsuite] Use long enums for case foldconst-3.c >

RE: [Patch, gcc, testsuite] Use long enums for case foldconst-3.c for target ARM EABI.

testcase problem for all > those platforms where it isn't. > > R. Agree. Here is the updated one. BR, Terry 2011-09-16 Terry Guo * gcc.dg/tree-ssa/foldconst-3.c: Don't use short enums. diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/foldconst-3.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tre

RE: [arm-embedded] Simply enable GCC to support -march=armv6s-m as GAS does.

Hello, I patched arm-arches.def and re-generated arm-tables.opt using command "./genopt.sh ../arm > arm-tables.opt" in directory gcc/config/arm. Now the updated patch is as below. Is it OK to trunk? BR, Terry 2011-09-19 Terry Guo * config/arm/arm-arches.def (a

[PATCH] Make the pass of 941014-1.c as a normal pass.

? BR, Terry 2011-09-20 Terry Guo * gcc.c-torture/execute/941014-1.x: Deleted. diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/941014-1.x b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/941014-1.x deleted file mode 100644 index bbe060e..000 --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/941014-1.x

RE: [Patch, testsuite, arm] Skip the arch conflict to enable case neon-thumb2-move pass on more targets.

Hello, > > > > I suppose you want a torture that excercises different -march/-mtune > > combinations then. > > > > But can't you do the pruning somewhere in an .exp file then instead > > of sprinkling it all over the tests itself? > > > > It seems not. At present the multilib options are all add

[arm-embedded] Backport mainline r177357

Backport mainline r177357 to ARM/embedded-4_6-branch. Committed. 2011-09-20 Terry Guo Backport r177357 from mainline 2011-08-04 Ian Bolton * gcc.target/arm/vfp-1.c: no large negative offsets on Thumb2.

[arm-embedded] Backport mainline r178975

Backport mainline r178975 to ARM/embedded-4_6-branch. Committed. 2011-09-21 Terry Guo Backport r178975 from mainline 2011-09-19 Ian Bolton * gcc.dg/20100906-1.c: Use -fno-short-enums option for "target arm_eabi".

RE: [PATCH] Make the pass of 941014-1.c as a normal pass.

Ping. BR, Terry > -Original Message- > From: Terry Guo [mailto:terry@arm.com] > Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2011 9:52 AM > To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org > Subject: [PATCH] Make the pass of 941014-1.c as a normal pass. > > Hello, > > This is an old case

[arm-embedded] Backport mainline r173371

Backport mainline r173371 to ARM/embedded-4_6-branch. Committed. 2011-09-28 Terry Guo Backport r173371 from mainline 2011-05-04 Andreas Krebbel * calls.c (emit_library_call_value_1): Invoke promote_function_mode hook on libcall arguments

[arm-embedded][PR38644] Fix stack red zone.

Committed to ARM/embedded-4_6-branch. 2011-09-28 Jiangning Liu PR rtl-optimization/38644 * config/i386/i386.c (ix86_stack_using_red_zone): Change inline to be extern. (TARGET_STACK_USING_RED_ZONE): New. * config/rs6000/rs6000.c (rs6000_stack_using_red_zone):

RE: [Ping][PATCH, libstdc++-v3] Enable to cross-test libstdc++ on simulator

Hi Jonathan, Thanks for reviewing the patch. Hi Richard, Can you please give some comments? BR, Terry > -Original Message- > From: Jonathan Wakely [mailto:jwakely@gmail.com] > Sent: Sunday, March 11, 2012 7:26 AM > To: Terry Guo > Cc: libstd...@gcc.gnu.org; gcc-patc

Re: [Ping][PATCH, libstdc++-v3] Enable to cross-test libstdc++ on simulator

Hello, Thanks Paolo Carlini for pointing out that I should put code changes in Makefile.am. This updated patch addresses this issue. Is it OK to trunk? BR, Terry 2012-03-26 Terry Guo * testsuite/Makefile.am (TEST_GCC_EXEC_PREFIX): New. * testsuite/Makefile.in: Regenerated

[Patch, ARM] Enable GCC to support new ARM core cortex-m0+

Hello, This simple patch is to enable GCC to accept new option -mcpu=cortex-m0plus in order to support newly released Cortex-M0+. Is it OK to trunk, 4.7 branch and 4.6 branch? BR, Terry 2012-04-06 Terry Guo * config/arm/arm-cores.def: Added core cortex-m0plus. * config/arm

RE: [Ping][PATCH, libstdc++-v3] Enable to cross-test libstdc++ on simulator

> -Original Message- > From: Paolo Carlini [mailto:paolo.carl...@oracle.com] > Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2012 9:15 AM > To: Terry Guo > Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; libstd...@gcc.gnu.org; r...@cebitec.uni- > Bielefeld.DE; mikest...@comcast.net; Richard Earnshaw; 'P

Re: [Patch, ARM] Enable GCC to support new ARM core cortex-m0+

Ping. On Fri, Apr 6, 2012 at 2:15 PM, Terry Guo wrote: > Hello, > > This simple patch is to enable GCC to accept new option -mcpu=cortex-m0plus > in order to support newly released Cortex-M0+. Is it OK to trunk, 4.7 branch > and 4.6 branch? > > BR, > Terry &

Propose to add a new argument MULTILIB_REQUIRED in multilib framework

e built. This new keyword can work with MULTILIB_EXCEPTIONS and it takes effect after the MULTILIB_EXCEPTIONS. Is it OK to trunk? Any comments are welcome. BR, Terry 2012-04-17 Terry Guo * Makefile.in (s-mlib): Add new argument MULTILIB_REQUIRED. * genmultilib (MULTILIB_R

RE: [RFC][GCC, Multilib]Make GCC more easier for user to select and build extra libraries for ARM targets.

t; To: Terry Guo > Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Richard Earnshaw > Subject: Re: [RFC][GCC, Multilib]Make GCC more easier for user to > select and build extra libraries for ARM targets. > > On Sun, 11 Sep 2011, Terry Guo wrote: > > > This patch intends to implement a convenie

[Ping][PATCH, libstdc++-v3] Enable to cross-test libstdc++ on simulator

Hello, Can anybody please review and approve the following simple patch? Thanks very much. http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++/2011-08/msg00063.html BR, Terry

<    1   2