From: Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Stafford Horne <shorne@gmail.com>
Cc: GCC patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>,
Openrisc <openrisc@lists.librecores.org>,
Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>,
Jeff Law <law@redhat.com>,
Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com>,
Joel Sherrill <joel@rtems.org>,
Sebastian Huber <sebastian.huber@embedded-brains.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] or1k: gcc: initial support for openrisc
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2018 08:16:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181028225447.GK5766@gate.crashing.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20181028214723.GD1761@lianli.shorne-pla.net>
Hi!
On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 06:47:23AM +0900, Stafford Horne wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 27, 2018 at 09:57:30PM -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > > +/* Helper for defining INITIAL_ELIMINATION_OFFSET.
> > > + We allow the following eliminiations:
> > > + FP -> HARD_FP or SP
> > > + AP -> HARD_FP or SP
> > > +
> > > + HFP and AP are the same which is handled below. */
> > > +
> > > +HOST_WIDE_INT
> > > +or1k_initial_elimination_offset (int from, int to)
> >
> > You could calculate this as some_offset (from) - some_offset (to) with
> > some_offset a simple helper function. That gives you all possible
> > eliminations :-)
> >
> > (Each offset is very cheap to compute in your case, so that's not a problem).
>
> Right, Do you mean something like the following? I think it would work, but I
> am not sure it make the code easier to read. Do you think there would be much
> benefits supporting all possible eliminations?
Yes, like that. It also easily can handle the other combos (those with
STACK_POINTER), and it is easier if you have to switch FRAME_GROWS_DOWNWARD
("false" is better on some args, but "true" is required for ssp).
Your code is fine as-is of course.
> > > +#undef TARGET_RTX_COSTS
> > > +#define TARGET_RTX_COSTS or1k_rtx_costs
> >
> > You may want TARGET_INSN_COST as well (it is easier to get (more) correct).
>
> OK, I was not considering that for the first port. Perhaps after getting this
> in? I think in general the OpenRISC insruction costs are fairly flat for the
> ones are using.
Oh, this was just a suggestion for the future :-)
If you compile with -dp you will see the cost and length for every insn
annotated; are most/all correct?
> > > + This ABI has no adjacent call-saved register, which means that
> > > + DImode/DFmode pseudos cannot be call-saved and will always be
> > > + spilled across calls. To solve this without changing the ABI,
> > > + remap the compiler internal register numbers to place the even
> > > + call-saved registers r16-r30 in 24-31, and the odd call-clobbered
> > > + registers r17-r31 in 16-23. */
> >
> > Ooh evilness :-)
>
> Richard did this, I thought it was rather clever. :)
Yes!
> > > +#define FUNCTION_ARG_REGNO_P(r) (r >= 3 && r <= 8)
> >
> > IN_RANGE ?
>
> OK, I may change it, I think without the macro, its easy to understand that its
> (inclusive).
Yeah, you'll have to remember that IN_RANGE always is inclusive too. Maybe
if it were used more that woul become second nature to more people :-)
Segher
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-10-28 23:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-10-27 6:03 [PATCH v3 0/3] OpenRISC port Stafford Horne
2018-10-27 9:34 ` [PATCH v3 1/3] or1k: libgcc: initial support for openrisc Stafford Horne
2018-10-28 3:19 ` Segher Boessenkool
2018-10-28 8:30 ` Stafford Horne
2018-10-28 9:16 ` Richard Henderson
2018-10-29 14:22 ` Stafford Horne
2018-10-27 10:31 ` [PATCH v3 3/3] or1k: gcc: " Stafford Horne
2018-10-28 12:38 ` Richard Henderson
2018-10-30 14:07 ` Stafford Horne
2018-10-30 17:06 ` Richard Henderson
2018-10-31 4:38 ` Stafford Horne
2018-10-28 14:13 ` Segher Boessenkool
2018-10-29 7:32 ` Stafford Horne
2018-10-29 8:16 ` Segher Boessenkool [this message]
2018-10-30 14:44 ` Stafford Horne
2018-10-30 17:21 ` Segher Boessenkool
2018-10-31 3:26 ` Stafford Horne
2018-10-31 15:04 ` Jeff Law
2018-10-29 7:49 ` Richard Henderson
2018-10-29 13:58 ` Stafford Horne
2018-10-29 18:07 ` Segher Boessenkool
2018-10-29 18:44 ` Richard Henderson
2018-10-30 12:49 ` Stafford Horne
2018-10-30 16:12 ` Segher Boessenkool
2018-10-29 15:02 ` Szabolcs Nagy
2018-11-04 9:05 ` Stafford Horne
2018-11-05 11:13 ` Szabolcs Nagy
2018-11-05 15:10 ` Rich Felker
2018-11-05 20:59 ` Stafford Horne
2018-11-05 20:52 ` Stafford Horne
2018-11-05 19:46 ` Richard Henderson
2018-11-05 20:16 ` Christophe Lyon
2018-10-27 11:00 ` [PATCH v3 2/3] or1k: testsuite: " Stafford Horne
2018-10-28 11:31 ` Richard Henderson
2018-10-28 12:21 ` [PATCH v3 0/3] OpenRISC port Richard Henderson
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20181028225447.GK5766@gate.crashing.org \
--to=segher@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=joel@rtems.org \
--cc=joseph@codesourcery.com \
--cc=law@redhat.com \
--cc=openrisc@lists.librecores.org \
--cc=rth@twiddle.net \
--cc=sebastian.huber@embedded-brains.de \
--cc=shorne@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).