From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 104741 invoked by alias); 3 Jan 2019 08:48:24 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 104502 invoked by uid 89); 3 Jan 2019 08:48:16 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy= X-HELO: foss.arm.com Received: from foss.arm.com (HELO foss.arm.com) (217.140.101.70) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Thu, 03 Jan 2019 08:48:14 +0000 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.72.51.249]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77FF5EBD; Thu, 3 Jan 2019 00:48:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (unknown [10.32.98.35]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A6B813F5CF; Thu, 3 Jan 2019 00:48:09 -0800 (PST) From: Richard Sandiford To: Steve Ellcey Mail-Followup-To: Steve Ellcey ,"sellcey\@cavium.com" , "gcc-patches\@gcc.gnu.org" , richard.sandiford@arm.com Cc: "sellcey\@cavium.com" , "gcc-patches\@gcc.gnu.org" Subject: Re: [Patch 3/4][Aarch64] v2: Implement Aarch64 SIMD ABI In-Reply-To: <4baec0c760870f427d04bccddf77a3f0dec9a5ce.camel@marvell.com> (Steve Ellcey's message of "Thu, 3 Jan 2019 00:09:24 +0000") References: <1541699683.12016.8.camel@cavium.com> <87efau51m3.fsf@arm.com> <4baec0c760870f427d04bccddf77a3f0dec9a5ce.camel@marvell.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.1 (gnu/linux) Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2019 08:48:00 -0000 Message-ID: <87bm4yt9do.fsf@arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-SW-Source: 2019-01/txt/msg00082.txt.bz2 Steve Ellcey writes: > Here is an update of this patch. I believe I addressed all of the > issues you raised. Thanks for the new target.def description, it > seems much clearer than mine. I did a full build and test on x86 as > well as aarch64 to make sure that architectures that do not define > TARGET_REMOVE_EXTRA_CALL_PRESERVED_REGS build correctly. > > Steve Ellcey > sellcey@marvell.com > > > 2019-01-02 Steve Ellcey > > * config/aarch64/aarch64.c (aarch64_simd_call_p): New function. > (aarch64_remove_extra_call_preserved_regs): New function. > (TARGET_REMOVE_EXTRA_CALL_PRESERVED_REGS): New macro. > * doc/tm.texi.in (TARGET_REMOVE_EXTRA_CALL_PRESERVED_REGS): New hook. > * final.c (get_call_reg_set_usage): Call new hook. > * target.def (remove_extra_call_preserved_regs): New hook. > * targhooks.c (default_remove_extra_call_preserved_regs): New function. > * targhooks.h (default_remove_extra_call_preserved_regs): New function. OK, thanks. Richard