new baby in the multilib family
Till Straumann
strauman at slac.stanford.edu
Mon Jul 7 21:32:55 UTC 2008
I just realized that a new baby (8540) recently has joined the already big
powerpc multilib family (IMO w/o good reason).
I would like to propose to weed this jungle prior to branching 4.9.
In particular, I would like to propose the following:
a) clean up some general conflicts, e.g.,
- RTEMS by default sets -meabi but MULTILIB_EXTRA_OPTS adds -mno-eabi
- RTEMS allows the lwsync instruction even though this is IBM only
and the use
of this opcode is (AFAK) undocumented for motorola classic PPCs but
crashes
e.g., BookE and PSIM.
- more stuff I don't remember out of my head right now...
b) have somebody explain why they think mcpu=XYZ other than mcpu=powerpc
is necessary
If no good reason is found after discussion, kill the unnecessary ones.
c) distill variants that really seem necessary. What comes to my mind is
1) integer instruction set. AFAIK everything we currently use
supports the
classic PPC UISA. Thus my belief that we can make -mcpu=powerpc
work.
2) FPU variants. Currently, only variants for soft-float and
classic FPU make
sense. Once we have 64-bit GPR context save-restore a
float-gprs variant
could be added.
3) ABI compatibility. Come up with a set of ABI variants that
makes sense
to support. What comes to my mind here:
hard and soft-float are NOT compatible
stack alignment of 16-bytes and 8-bytes could
make sense
4) Other
Altivec, SPE, ... hardware
use of short-data areas
RFC
-- Till
More information about the users
mailing list