This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: More PA64 infrastructure
- To: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
- Subject: Re: More PA64 infrastructure
- From: Jeffrey A Law <law at cygnus dot com>
- Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2000 13:46:29 -0700
- cc: Geert Bosch <bosch at gnat dot com>, "gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Reply-To: law at cygnus dot com
In message <20000314214924.A965@mff.cuni.cz>you write:
> > Two different object file formats (PA32 uses SOM, PA64 uses ELF).
> >
> > Two radically different ABIs (arguments growing in opposite directions fo
> r
> > example).
> >
> > SUBREGs don't work worth a damn when you have registers that are smaller
> than
> > word_size (FP registers on the PA have this property).
>
> That's what SUBREG_BYTE patches are about...
I'm well aware of that. It was far easier and cleaner to just ditch the
concept of using the registers in 32bit hunks.
> etc.) and so far it seems to me like a win to have one compiler which works
> for everything (ok, provided it is a 64bit application, so that it
> HOST_WIDE_INT is not an long long to slow things down).
I generally agree about having a single compiler which can generate both
kinds of code. The PA is a rather odd situation because of the different
object file formats, *wildly different ABIs* and other stuff, just trust me :-)
jeff