[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       cfe-dev
Subject:    Re: [cfe-dev] Workaround for bug 16070 ?
From:       Tim Northover <t.p.northover () gmail ! com>
Date:       2013-08-09 13:40:11
Message-ID: CAFHTzfJUuu8hUtEgEcfeGr2VXSP8esJDOD6nJOtsksGMU+OYsg () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

> It has been two weeks. Tim any further input?

I started a reply earlier, but somehow deleted it, sorry. I think it's
a tricky situation because Cortex-A8 isn't the minimal CPU that could
reasonably have VFP. GCC, for example, defaults to some ARM9 with an
FPU added (which has some claim to being the minimal possible
combination that would make sense for gnueabihf).

We don't have to follow them, of course. If no-one is actually using
configurations like that we could choose arm1176jzf-s (Raspberry Pi
has this, so it's reasonably common at the moment). In my opinion we
can forget about arm9 and earlier for this, so unless anyone pipes up
to disagree I'd be happy to commit the arm1176jzf-s one.

As for HasHardwareFloat, I think I'd just go for
"Triple.getEnvironment() == llvm::Triple::GNUEABIHF", I don't think
any of the others need hardware float.

It's probably best to post patches as an attachment to cfe-commits
rather than cfe-dev too (more people read that list for reviews and so
on). Tests are also a good idea. See
http://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html#making-a-patch

Tim.
_______________________________________________
cfe-dev mailing list
cfe-dev@cs.uiuc.edu
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]