Hi,
Thank you very much, everyone, who gave me useful advice.
I might conclude that extension of GCC for HCQC is
completely unnecessary.
Richard Sandiford writes:
> An alternative to adding a new flag might be to check:
>
>MEM_EXPR (mem) == get_spill_slot_decl (false)
I think that this meth
Sorry for the delayed response.
Masaki Arai writes:
> Hi,
>
> Thank you very much for your quick check and reply.
>
> Kugan Vivekanandarajah writes:
>> > I looked into the structure, adding this field is not going to make the
> s=
>> tructure bigger for either ILP32 or LP64 targets. If you want
On 29 August 2017 at 17:36, Masaki Arai wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Renato Golin writes:
>> On 29 August 2017 at 10:15, Masaki Arai wrote:
>>> If there is no objection, I will consider proposing this function(and
>>> alternative
>>> appraoch) on the GCC mailing list (after improving print
>>> strings and a
Hi,
Renato Golin writes:
> On 29 August 2017 at 10:15, Masaki Arai wrote:
>> If there is no objection, I will consider proposing this function(and
>> alternative
>> appraoch) on the GCC mailing list (after improving print
>> strings and actual patch files)．
>
> I think that'll be the best way fo
On 29 August 2017 at 10:15, Masaki Arai wrote:
> Thank you very much for your comments and advice.
> I checked the URL．
> If there is no objection, I will consider proposing this function(and
> alternative
> appraoch) on the GCC mailing list (after improving print
> strings and actual patch files)
Hi,
Kugan Vivekanandarajah writes:
>> Even though memory usage does not increase, I understand the policy of
>> wanting to make the data structure simple.
>>
>> Another way to implement this feature is to use the `addrspace' field
>> in `struct mem_attrs' without adding any fields.
>> I think tha
Hi,
On 29 August 2017 at 04:54, Masaki Arai wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Thank you very much for your quick check and reply.
>
> Kugan Vivekanandarajah writes:
>> > I looked into the structure, adding this field is not going to make the
> s=
>> tructure bigger for either ILP32 or LP64 targets. If you want,
Hi,
Thank you very much for your quick check and reply.
Kugan Vivekanandarajah writes:
> > I looked into the structure, adding this field is not going to make the
s=
> tructure bigger for either ILP32 or LP64 targets. If you want, you use
bit=
> -fields; there is one bool already there which me
untested):
> {
> operands[2] = GEN_INT (aarch64_fpconst_pow_of_2 (operands[2]));
> return "fcvtz\t%0, %1, %2";
> }
>
> Thanks,
> Andrew
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: linaro-toolchain [mailto:linaro-toolchain-boun...@lists.linaro.org] On
&
Hi,
On 26 August 2017 at 04:04, Renato Golin wrote:
> +linaro-toolchain, hoping to get more eyes into it.
>
> cheers,
> --renato
>
> On 25 August 2017 at 17:59, Masaki Arai wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I extended GCC 7.1(or GCC 7.2) for `hcqc'.
>> I would be grateful if you could give me a comment about
+linaro-toolchain, hoping to get more eyes into it.
cheers,
--renato
On 25 August 2017 at 17:59, Masaki Arai wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I extended GCC 7.1(or GCC 7.2) for `hcqc'.
> I would be grateful if you could give me a comment about whether
> this extension is acceptable and whether this extension sh
11 matches
Mail list logo
