- linaro-toolchain - lists.linaro.org

by Ira Rosen

Hi, I continued looking into EEMBC benchmarks: - telecom fft is not vectorized because unknown number of iterations. It has both non-constant step and its loop bound may overflow. I think, the solution here could be loop versioning, but since versioning increases code size, this kind of optimization can be less beneficial. - telecom viterbi (vectorization potential gain is 4x) requires conditional store sinking and load hoisting to enable if-conversion. I worked on implementation of store sinking this week. Ira

15 years, 9 months

2
3
0 0

Re: Extension elimination pass breaks SPU (Fw: spu gcc-4.5 linaro build failure)

by Ulrich Weigand

Ulrich Weigand/Germany/IBM wrote on 12/20/2010 06:01:21 PM: > Mark Mitchell <mark(a)codesourcery.com> wrote: > > On 12/20/2010 8:35 AM, Ulrich Weigand wrote: > > > Now, I guess there's two ways forward: either the outcome of the ongoing > > > discussions on gcc-patches is that it is in fact not a good idea to > > > generate such sets, and the EE pass is subsequently rewritten to avoid > > > them; or else, if those instructions are considered valid, I'll have to > > > extend the SPU move expander to handle them. Thoughts? > > > > I haven't participated in the upstream discussion -- I'm way behind on > > that list :-( :-( -- but I think such sets should be considered valid. > > OK, I'll have a look at fixing the SPU back-end then. I've now fixed this problem in the back-end upstream: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-12/msg01694.html I've also created a back-port to Linaro GCC 4.5 and proposed the branch for merge; you can find the details at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc-linaro/4.5/+bug/693425 Mit freundlichen Gruessen / Best Regards Ulrich Weigand -- Dr. Ulrich Weigand | Phone: +49-7031/16-3727 STSM, GNU compiler and toolchain for Linux on System z and Cell/B.E. IBM Deutschland Research & Development GmbH Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: Martin Jetter | Geschäftsführung: Dirk Wittkopp Sitz der Gesellschaft: Böblingen | Registergericht: Amtsgericht Stuttgart, HRB 243294

15 years, 9 months

1
0
0 0

[ACTIVITY] Dec. 13 -- Dec. 19

by Zach Welch

== Last Week == * Continued working on ARM unwinding in libunwind. Produced a draft write-up of my progress in the event that I don't finish this work before being swapped out of Linaro. * (Re-)submitted patches to fix ltrace test suite. Hopefully, these will be the last changes before the new release. == This Week == * Continue working on libunwind. -- Zach Welch CodeSourcery zwelch(a)codesourcery.com (650) 331-3385 x743

15 years, 9 months

1
0
0 0

GCC for Android

by Patrik Ryd

Hi, We would like to build Android with the Linaro tool chain. Do any of you know what kind of work will be needed to adapt Linaro gcc to Android? Regards, Patrik

15 years, 9 months

1
0
0 0

[ACTIVITY] Dec.13 -- Dec.19

by Chung-Lin Tang

== GCC related == * CS Issue #10201 / PR46883, unrecognizable insn ICE when compiling Samba. Fixed this by changing the predicates of two split patterns. Patch reviewed in CS internally and upstream, committed upstream, will backport to SG++ and Linaro soon. * LP:641397/PR46888: bitfield insert optimization. Andrew Pinski found a testcase that escapes the CSE patch gets handled by combine, and also found another bug with REG_EQUIV notes. Only looked at this minimally last week, will really work on this later. * LP:687406/PR46865, -save-temps creating different code. Backported and bzr-pushed the upstream fix by Jakub Jelinek. * PR45416, ARM code regression. Mostly can generate what I wanted by now, under ARM and x86, although patch is still not in a submittable state. * VFP index patch. Uncommitted GCC patch of mine from last year; added Thumb-2 bits and corrected some things in the testcase. Committed upstream. == This week == * Really get January travel stuff nailed. * Upstream patch review is probably going to start getting slow/suspended this week. Will probably do some study stuff on larger projects. * Continue to look at GCC issues.

15 years, 9 months

1
0
0 0

[ACTIVITY] Dec. 13th -- Dec. 18th

by Yao Qi

== Linaro GDB == * LP:615972 Different output of 'info register' w/ and wo/ corefile. Understands gcore impl in gdb. Two patches are reviewed in upstreams. One is approved by Dan, and the other is still be reviewed. Evaluate the two approaches for NEON registers in corefile. Resume the discussion on kernel support for dumping NEON registers. Need a decision with kernel side, but no progress on it. * LP:685494 Revise patch per Pedro's suggestion. Waiting for someone to approve it. * LP:685702 Get it approved for FSF GDB 7.2 branch. Committed to both FSF 7.2 branch and Linaro tree. * LP:616003 gdb.mi/mi-var-display.exp failure GDB always assumes $fp is r11, even code is in thumb mode. Current GDB infrastructure can't handle mapping the same alias to two different registers. Proposed a new gdbarch took for this in upstreams, in order to increase the flexibility of GDB. No reply yet. * LP:616001 gdb.mi/mi-var-cmd.exp failure Ulrich pointed out it is caused by stack randomization. Confirmed this by setting "kernel.randomize_va_space" to zero. Figure out why this case passes on x86, because it is more restricted to turn on stack randomization on x86. * LP:615980 Support displaced stepping on Thumb Understands displaced stepping in GDB/ARM. Find a bug when GDB tries to execute ARM instruction in copy area, which is in Thumb mode (copy area starts from "_start + 4", and it is compiled in Thumb mode in Ubuntu). The fix is an one-line patch, which doesn't update status register when writing PC in displaced stepping. Write a test case for arm displaced stepping. Write code in ARM asm directly for the first time, which is very helpful to remember ARM asm instructions. Read ARM ARM and decode 16-bit thumb instructions in GDB for displaced stepping. It doesn't work so far because breakpoint instruction after instructions in copy area is still hard-coded to ARM breakpoint insn. == Misc == * Linaro GCC optimization meeting. == This Week == * LP:615980 Support displaced stepping on Thumb Send my fix and test case to upstreams for review. Make displaced stepping work on 16-bit instruction. * Ping other GDB patches. -- Yao (齐尧)

15 years, 9 months

1
0
0 0

Re: Profile guided and string routines?

by Steven Bosscher

Mark Mitchell wrote: > > If Profile Guiding could spot that a particular callsite to say strlen() > > was often associated with strings > > of at least 'n' characters we could call a different implementation. > > I don't believe this is possible current profile-guided optimization, > but certainly it could be done. It looks to me like a case of value profiling, see tree-profile.c, for the various "stringops" optimizations. Unless I misunderstand David's idea here or missing something else, it seems that this kind of optimization should fit in the existing infrastructure without too much effort. Ciao! Steven

15 years, 9 months

2
1
0 0

Profile guided and string routines?

by David Gilbert

Does anyone have any experience of what can be profiled in the profiled guided optimisations? One of the problems with some of the string routines is that you can write pretty neat fast routines that work well for long strings - but most of the calls actually pass short strings and the overhead of the fast routine means that for most cases you are slower than you would have been with a simple routine. If Profile Guiding could spot that a particular callsite to say strlen() was often associated with strings of at least 'n' characters we could call a different implementation. Dave

15 years, 9 months

3
3
0 0

[ACTIVITY] 13th -18th December 2010

by Andrew Stubbs

* Linaro GCC lp:686381: C++ link failure on ARM Reproduced the bug and posted my findings to the bug report - user error. Changed the way the Linaro GCC version numbers are handled. Hopefully the new system should be less distasteful to Matthias. Updated the GCC release procedure document to match. Organised and chaired a meeting to discuss GCC optimization opportunities for ARM. It was well attended, and I think we had some useful discussion. Spend quite some time preparing beforehand, and writing it up afterwards. Next step is to come up with some actual plans to implement something. I imagine we can discuss this at the sprint in Dallas next month. See https://wiki.linaro.org/AndrewStubbs/Sandbox/GCCoptimizations * Upstream GCC My upstream patch to fix ARM smlabb has been approved and committed to GCC 4.6 (mainline). Only another three patches need approval now! Continued testing upstream GCC 4.6 with both cross and native builds. It appears to be in a buildable state now, with no extra patches required. I've updated the Linaro GCC 4.6 branch with the buildable state. * Other Updated my ESTA, and added my security details to the airline bookings. ------ Future availability 20th Dec .. 3rd Jan - Vacation/Holiday 4th Jan .. 8th Jan - Business as usual 9th Jan .. 14th Jan - Linaro Sprint, Dallas 15th Jan .. 21st Jan - CodeSourcery/Mentor Annual Meeting, Scottsdale 24th Jan onwards - normal service restored!

15 years, 9 months

1
0
0 0

[ACTIVITY] 2010-12-17

by David Gilbert

Got SPEC2006 building on Silverbell (VExpress) and Canis1 (Orion). There are still some issues; The builds are still going (6 hours so far on a 1GHz A9 for a build and 'test' case), and the Silverbell one has hit an ICE on one of the tests that looks like 635409, and also looks like it needs some help getting Perl to work. The build on Canis has only just started, but hasn't got Fortran installed. (The SPEC2006 tools build also failed in the Perl testsuite on sprintf.t and sprintf2.t which seem to test integer overflow cases in sprintf % fields) Added a few of the kernel string/memory routines and bionic routines into my string/memory graphs and also ran the tests on the Orion board (similar to other A9 performance - no surprise). Wrote up a draft of an email to libffi-dev describing the varargs state; and as I was doing it realised that one of the ways didn't quite work and was more messy. Using rdepends to find all packages using ffi, need to figure out if any actually care about varargs. Dave

15 years, 9 months

1
0
0 0

[ACTIVITY] Dec 13 - Dec 17

by Ulrich Weigand

== GCC == * Completed first successful bootstrap and regression test run of GCC mainline on my IGEPv2 board. * Worked on implementing fix for #617384 (.debug_line is wrong with -fpic) * Worked on backporting fix for #662324 (Pointer type information lost in 4.5 debuginfo) * Analyzed root cause of PR target/46883 (GCC ICE with error: unrecognizable insn) Mit freundlichen Gruessen / Best Regards Ulrich Weigand -- Dr. Ulrich Weigand | Phone: +49-7031/16-3727 STSM, GNU compiler and toolchain for Linux on System z and Cell/B.E. IBM Deutschland Research & Development GmbH Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: Martin Jetter | Geschäftsführung: Dirk Wittkopp Sitz der Gesellschaft: Böblingen | Registergericht: Amtsgericht Stuttgart, HRB 243294

15 years, 9 months

1
0
0 0

No meetings over the Christmas break

by Michael Hope

Hi there. I've cancelled the weekly and standup calls for the next two weeks. The next scheduled call is the standup call on Wednesday the 5th of January. Please attend if you can as it's our last one before the sprint. See you then! -- Michael

15 years, 9 months

1
0
0 0

Topics for the sprint

by Michael Hope

Hi there. The sprint is just around the corner and it's a good time to think about how we can make best use of the week. I've put some topics up at: https://wiki.linaro.org/Events/2011-01-LinaroSprint/ToolChainWG Please feel free to add to it. Have a think about anything that's easier to do while everyone is in the same room - things like discussions, kicking off some work, a bit of pair programming on a problem, or anything that overlaps with another group or Ubuntu. -- Michael

15 years, 9 months

1
0
0 0

[ACTIVITY] report week 50

by Peter Maydell

RAG: Red: Amber: Green: Milestones: | Planned | Estimate | Actual | finish virtio-system | 2010-08-27 | postponed | | get valgrind into linaro PPA | 2010-09-15 | 2010-09-28 | 2010-09-28 | complete a qemu-maemo update | 2010-09-24 | 2010-09-22 | 2010-09-22 | finish testing PCI patches | 2010-10-01 | 2010-10-22 | 2010-10-18 | Progress: * merge-correctness-fixes: ** Submitted patchset upstream to fix NaN propagation to follow ARM ARM rules rather than x87 semantics: http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/75742/ http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/75743/ * maintain-beagle-models: ** Finished implementation of the OMAP NAND prefetch/postwrite engine including its DMA support. Patches submitted to the qemu-maemo upstream tree and merged by Juha: http://meego.gitorious.org/qemu-maemo/qemu/merge_requests/1 ** Fixed the (cosmetic) bug https://bugs.launchpad.net/qemu-maemo/+bug/622408 where we were complaining about "Unknown CMD52" when Linux probed for the presence of SDIO cards. Fix merged into qemu-maemo: http://meego.gitorious.org/qemu-maemo/qemu/merge_requests/2 * qemu-continuous-integration: ** Discussion with Loic about setting up jobs on his Hudson instance for testing qemu against snapshots/hwpacks. * packageselection-arm-n-more-stable-vm-solution-for-arm ** Discussion about Ubuntu moving to using a qemu-maemo based qemu for ARM purposes. The Ubuntu blueprint is https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/packageselection-arm-n-more-s… We need to come to agreement about what parts of this are going to be done by variously Linaro toolchain, Linaro foundations and Ubuntu. ** I'm going through doing another rebase-and-package of the Linaro qemu, and finishing off writing up the notes on the process: https://wiki.linaro.org/WorkingGroups/ToolChain/QemuReleaseProcess Meetings: toolchain, pdsw-tools, pdsw-tools xmas lunch :-) Issues: * a number of qemu patches in progress are logjammed behind the outstanding git pull request * the dbgsym debug packages for linaro kernels seem to have vanished: https://bugs.launchpad.net/linaro-images/+bug/691192 Absences: (complete to end of 2010) Fri 17 Dec - Tue 4 Jan inclusive. 2011: Dallas Linaro sprint 9-15 Jan. Holiday 22 Apr - 2 May.

15 years, 9 months

1
0
0 0

[ACTIVITY] weekly status

by Ken Werner

Hi, * I've spent some time for testing the patches that allow the GCC trunk to bootstrap again on ARM and posted the results to gcc-testresults * finally tested and posted the patch that optimizes the __sync_* builtins (#681138) on gcc-patches * investigated on the state of the crash utility on ARM (or rather its prerequisites like kexec) https://wiki.linaro.org/KenWerner/Sandbox/crash-utility * I'm on holiday now :) Regards Ken

15 years, 9 months

1
0
0 0

Re: RFC: -mimplicit-it and GCC upstream

by Dave Martin

Hi, On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 1:44 AM, Michael Hope <michael.hope(a)linaro.org> wrote: > On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 1:05 PM, Steve Langasek > <steve.langasek(a)linaro.org> wrote: >> Hi Michael, >> >> On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 09:29:38AM +1300, Michael Hope wrote: >>> Hi Steve. I'd like to hand the rest of this over to you if that's OK. >> >> Yep, we can take it from here. To be clear, is this an additional change >> above and beyond what Matthias reports is currently in Ubuntu gcc >> (http://lists.linaro.org/pipermail/linaro-toolchain/2010-November/000441.html), >> and if so, in what version of Linaro GCC is it going to become effective? >> Do we have documentation of what the relevant failure modes caused by this >> change *look* like, so that we can at least be triaging them appropriately >> until there's some documentation on how to fix the resulting bugs? > > There will be many failures in many packages. The problem is when you > use conditional suffixes on instructions: previously the compiler > would insert an implicit instruction before that; now we have to be > explicit. > > The failures are easy to diagnose and fix. The build will fail with a > message from the assembler along the lines of 'xxx instruction outside > an IT block'. The fix is to find the inline assembly code, insert the > appropriate IT instruction, and re-build. The assembler will validate > the IT instruction against the following conditional instructions so > the change is quite safe. Did someone manage to find out which versions of binutils can silently accept the IT instructions when assembling for ARM? This affects what advice we should give on how to avoid breaking upstream with our additions. The safest approach is #ifdefs, but it will be better for maintenance if we can avoid this, since it will render the code very messy. Cheers ---Dave

15 years, 9 months

1
0
0 0

Blueprint changes

by Michael Hope

Hi there. Some of the tr-* blueprints had work items in them and this was interfering with the tools that the PM guys use. I've created new engineering blueprints, pulled the work items across into them, and added the new engineering blueprint as a dependency of the old TR. Sorry for the blueprint spam. In most cases the new blueprint has the same name and subject as the TR one, such as the TR: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/linaro/+spec/tr-toolchain-4.5-in-distros which is backed by the engineering blueprint: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/gcc-linaro/+spec/4.5-in-distros -- Michael

15 years, 9 months

1
0
0 0

RFC: -mimplicit-it and GCC upstream

by Dave Martin

Hi Richard, Recapping on this earlier conversation: http://lists.linaro.org/pipermail/linaro-toolchain/2010-July/000030.html http://lists.linaro.org/pipermail/linaro-toolchain/2010-July/000035.html Is it worth another attempt to make a case to upstream for supporting passing -mimplicit-it=thumb by default to gas? According to my understanding of this issue, my argument would go as follows: * gcc currently estimates the size of asm blocks, rather than determining the size accurately. * gcc cannot guarantee the right answer for asm block size when asm blocks contain directives etc., however use of directives in asm blocks is widespread * gcc cannot guarantee the right answer for asm block size in Thumb-2. gcc conservatively overestimates the size by assuming that each statement of the asm block expands to 4 bytes. * All of Ubuntu lucid and maverick has been built with -mimplicit-it=thumb passwd by default, with no known build or runtime failures arising from this (so size issues aside, we have confidence that the resulting code generation is sound) * -mimplicit-it=thumb -mthumb makes the asm block size estimation unsafe: the asm block can exceed the estimated size even in the absence of directives, which may lead to fixup range errors during assembly. * Following the principles already established for Thumb-2 in general the estimation can be made safe (or, as safe as the established Thumb-2 behaviour) by raising the assumed maximum statement expansion size for asm blocks to 6 bytes, since -mimplicit-it will add as most a single (16-bit) IT instruction to each statement. * The vast majority of all asm blocks are small (< 20 instructions, say), so the overall overestimate in sizes will generally be modest for any given compilation unit. * -mimplicit-it is already _required_ by the Linux kernel and possible other projects. ...so... * With -mimplicit-it=thumb and a 6-byte asm block statement expansion size estimate, we have toolchain behaviour which is as reliable, and as correct, as it is in upstream at present. * Layout of data in the compiler output will be more optimal in some cases, and less optimal in other cases, compared with the the current Thumb-2 behaviour, due to differing asm block size estimates. The exact behaviour will depend on the distribution of conditional instructions within asm blocks. * Taken over a whole compilation unit, the total code size overestimate (and therefore the impact on object layout) will normally be modest, due to the small typical size of asm blocks. * Behaviour for -marm will not be impacted at all. If gcc currently estimated asm block code size accurately, then I could understand upstream's objection; but as it stands it seems to me we wouldn't be making anything worse in practice with the proposed change; and there is no compatibility impact (other than positive impact). Of course, I may have some wrong assumptions here, or there may be some background I'm not aware of... Comments? Cheers ---Dave

15 years, 9 months

5
10
0 0

[ACTIVITY] December 6th-12th

by Julian Brown

== Linaro GCC == * Finish testing for big-endian/quad-word patch on mainline, and send upstream. Not yet reviewed by an ARM maintainer, but Joseph suggested tweaking DejaGnu's target-supports to better reflect the new capabilities of the vectorizer in big-endian mode. I've not looked into that yet. * Started looking at improving element/structure load/store intrinsics. Made it so that the structs used for loads/stores are created in the backend so that the types can be used directly by the builtins, but discovered that the front-end/middle-end would not play along with that plan as they are. Thought about ways to fix that. * Some time spent on other CodeSourcery stuff.

15 years, 9 months

1
0
0 0

Linaro GCC 4.4 and 4.5 2010-12 released

by Michael Hope

The Linaro Toolchain Working Group is pleased to announce the release of both Linaro GCC 4.4 and Linaro GCC 4.5. Linaro GCC 4.5 is the fifth release in the 4.5 series. Based off the latest GCC 4.5.1+svn167157, it includes many ARM-focused performance improvements and bug fixes. Linaro GCC 4.4 is the fifth release in the 4.4 series. Based off the latest GCC 4.4.5, it is a maintenance release that fixes one problem found through use. Interesting changes include: * A new performance focused extension elimination pass * Speed and size improvements when loading constants * Performance improvements on compound conditionals * A range of correctness improvements The source tarballs are available from: https://launchpad.net/gcc-linaro/+milestone/4.5-2010.12-0 and https://launchpad.net/gcc-linaro/+milestone/4.4-2010.12-0 Downloads are available from the Linaro GCC page on Launchpad: https://launchpad.net/gcc-linaro No changes have been committed to Linaro GDB 7.2 this month. -- Michael

15 years, 9 months

1
0
0 0

[ACTIVITY] 6th - 10th December

by Andrew Stubbs

* Linaro GCC 4.4/4.5 Merged the latest CS patches and Linaro merge requests into Linaro GCC (4.4 and 4.5). Ran regression tests. Yao's patch failed so I backed it out, and made the release tarballs. Uploaded the releases to Michael Hope for release. lp:686381: luatex fails to build with gcc-4.5 Fired off a test build to reproduce the problem. Will come back to this next week. * GCC 4.6/4.7 Posted my various queued patches up to gcc-patches(a)gcc.gnu.org for review. Looked at the state of the GCC 4.6 upstream build. There are currently two problems: 1. libquadmath must be disabled in a cross-build for the bootstrap phases. 2. libstdc++ doesn't build. There is a patch for it on the mail list, but it's not applied yet. Once gcc 4.6 builds cleanly, I shall update the Launchpad 4.6 branch, and declare that the baseline for our development. We'll then have somewhere to commit and track patches awaiting GCC stage 1 development. * Other Caught up with email following my holiday. Yet again, my IGEPv2 board suffered a corrupt file system. I've now upgraded the kernel and configured it to use an NFS root. The board is now somewhat less mobile, but should work more reliably. Continued organizing the a brain-storming session for GCC optimization improvements. Organised flights and hotel for both the Linaro Sprint and CodeSourcery annual meeting in January.

15 years, 9 months

2
1
0 0

[ACTIVITY] Dec. 06 -- Dec. 12

by Zach Welch

== Last Week == * Spent time tracking down a couple of regressions that appeared in the new ltrace release-candidate tree. Submitted a bunch of patches to fix the issues that were discovered during that process; most have been applied. * Finished writing fairly generic code for handling ARM-specific unwind tables, from lookup through decoding and dispatch. It uses a few definitions specific to libunwind, but those probably could be eliminated with more work. == This Week == * Integrate new ARM-specific bits into libunwind framework. * Rewrite part of a portability patch for ltrace and hope that those changes reflect the very last effort that will be required for that particular task. -- Zach Welch CodeSourcery zwelch(a)codesourcery.com (650) 331-3385 x743

15 years, 9 months

1
0
0 0

Re: Neon registers in core files

by Dave Martin

On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 9:06 AM, Yao Qi <yao.qi(a)linaro.org> wrote: > Hi, Kernel WG, > Can recent kernel handle NEON registers in corefiles? > > Seems we've had plan for this in "Ensure full NEON debug support" in > https://wiki.linaro.org/WorkingGroups/KernelConsolidation/Specs/BSPInvestig… > Any progress on this piece of work? We want to handle NEON registers in > corefiles from GDB, which required kernel dump them in corefile first. Hmmm, actually that bullet may have ended up in the wrong place ... since it's not a BSP-specific feature. Anyway, looking at the kernel code, it looks like the VFP/NEON state is not dumped into the core file. If it makes you feel better, the state of the obsolete FPE extension registers is dumped, if used :/ My guess is that it shouldn't be hard to dump the VFP/NEON state, but GDB and the kernel need to agree on the format. Rather that trying to hack the existing register dump format in a compatible way, I suggest it's simplest if the kernel creates an extra section in the dump containing something like: .long format_version /* reserved for future expansion - must be 0 */ .long FPSID .long FPSCR .long MVFR0 /* or 0 if not present in the hardware */ .long MVFR1 /* or 0 if not present in the hardware */ .long d0 .long d1 /* ... d2-d14 ... */ .long d15 If 32 D-registers in the hardware [ .long d16 .long d17 /* ... d18-d30 ... */ .long d31 ] I believe we don't need any extra flags to indicate whether the MVFRx fields are valid, since 0 in these registers indicates the VFPv2/legacy behaviour anyway. Note that some VFPv2 implementations (such as ARM1176) do provide these registers, and where the hardware has them, the kernel can fill them in when doing the coredump. We _should_ be prepared to ignore these fields (or interpret them differently) if a vendor-specific VFP subarchitecture is specified (by (FPSID & 0x4000) == 0x4000) The number of D-registers can be deduced from the FPSID and MVFRx registers, so we don't need to record it explicitly. When MVFRx are not present, there are 16 D-registers. When MVFRx are present, and (MVFR0 & 0xF) >= 2, there are 32 (or more) D-registers This is just a sketch -- the ARM ARM is the authoritative reference on the meanings of these bitfields. Any views on this? Cheers ---Dave > > _______________________________________________ > linaro-dev mailing list > linaro-dev(a)lists.linaro.org > http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev >

15 years, 9 months

3
2
0 0

[ACTIVITY] Dec 6 - Dec 10

by Ulrich Weigand

== GCC == * Tracked down root cause of GCC mainline bootstrap failure on ARM (PR 46040 - "__DTOR_LIST__ undeclared"). == Miscellaneous == * Set up IGEP v2 board (w/ local disk, network, ...) as native GCC / GDB build environment. * Gave talk on Linaro at the "2010 Linux Community Event" at Siemens Munich (w/ Arnd Bergmann). Mit freundlichen Gruessen / Best Regards Ulrich Weigand -- Dr. Ulrich Weigand | Phone: +49-7031/16-3727 STSM, GNU compiler and toolchain for Linux on System z and Cell/B.E. IBM Deutschland Research & Development GmbH Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: Martin Jetter | Geschäftsführung: Dirk Wittkopp Sitz der Gesellschaft: Böblingen | Registergericht: Amtsgericht Stuttgart, HRB 243294

15 years, 9 months

1
0
0 0

Invitation: TWG GCC Optimization @ Wed 2010-12-15 9am - 10am (linaro-toolchain@lists.linaro.org)

by Andrew Stubbs

You have been invited to the following event. Title: TWG GCC Optimization Discuss ideas for improving GCC optimization for ARM. Open to anybody who wants to contribute. https://wiki.linaro.org/AndrewStubbs/Sandbox/GCCoptimizations International: +44 1452 567 588 UK: 0844 493 3801 Brazil: 08008912092 China: 108007121533 India: 0008001006354 Taiwan: 00801126472 United States: 18666161738 Conference code 2634417169# When: Wed 2010-12-15 9am – 10am London Where: Conference call code 263 441 7169 Calendar: linaro-toolchain(a)lists.linaro.org Who: * andrew.stubbs(a)linaro.org - creator * Ken Werner - optional * stevenb.gcc(a)gmail.com - optional * Michael Hope - optional * David Gilbert - optional * Peter Maydell - optional * ulrich.weigand(a)de.ibm.com - optional * Yao Qi - optional * Julian Brown - optional * paul(a)codesourcery.com - optional * Ira Rosen - optional * richard.earnshaw(a)arm.com - optional * Chung-Lin Tang - optional * mark(a)codesourcery.com - optional * linaro-toolchain(a)lists.linaro.org - optional * Richard Sandiford - optional * Marcin Juszkiewicz - optional * zwelch(a)codesourcery.com - optional Your attendance is optional. Event details: https://www.google.com/calendar/event?action=VIEW&eid=aXJlc2Z2bWZmZzQ5cGQ4b… Invitation from Google Calendar: https://www.google.com/calendar/ You are receiving this courtesy email at the account linaro-toolchain(a)lists.linaro.org because you are an attendee of this event. To stop receiving future notifications for this event, decline this event. Alternatively you can sign up for a Google account at https://www.google.com/calendar/ and control your notification settings for your entire calendar.

15 years, 9 months

1
0
0 0

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

linaro-toolchain