From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 123967 invoked by alias); 12 Nov 2015 10:07:38 -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 123952 invoked by uid 89); 12 Nov 2015 10:07:37 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-0.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mail-wm0-f54.google.com Received: from mail-wm0-f54.google.com (HELO mail-wm0-f54.google.com) (74.125.82.54) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-GCM-SHA256 encrypted) ESMTPS; Thu, 12 Nov 2015 10:07:36 +0000 Received: by wmww144 with SMTP id w144so80953170wmw.0 for ; Thu, 12 Nov 2015 02:07:34 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.28.128.210 with SMTP id b201mr15591588wmd.69.1447322853758; Thu, 12 Nov 2015 02:07:33 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.194.137.208 with HTTP; Thu, 12 Nov 2015 02:07:33 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <56445A33.5030901@st.com> References: <5641D99E.2080607@foss.arm.com> <56445A33.5030901@st.com> Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2015 10:07:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [Patch ARM] Switch ARM to unified asm. From: Ramana Radhakrishnan To: Christian Bruel Cc: Ramana Radhakrishnan , gcc-patches Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2015-11/txt/msg01474.txt.bz2 On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 9:21 AM, Christian Bruel wrote: > Hi Ramana, > > On 11/10/2015 12:48 PM, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote: >> >> [Resending as I managed to muck this up with my mail client] >> >> Hi, >> >> I held off committing a previous version of this patch that I posted in >> July to be nice to folks backporting fixes and to watch for any objections >> to move the ARM backend completely over into the unified assembler. >> >> The patch does the following. >> >> * The compiler now generates code in all ISA modes in unified asm. >> * We've had unified asm only for the last 10 years, ever since the first >> Thumb2 support was put in, the disassembler generates output in unified >> assembler, while the compiler output is always in divided syntax for ARM >> state. >> * This means patterns get simpler not having to worry about the position >> of the condition in a conditional instruction. For example we now >> consistently use >> a. ldrbeq rather than ldreqb >> b. movseq rather than moveqs >> c. Or indeed the appropriate push / pop instructions whereever >> appropriate. >> >> >> The compiler behaviour has not changed in terms of what it does with >> inline assembler, that still remains in divided syntax and over time we need >> to move all of this over to unified syntax if we can do so as all the >> official documentation is now in terms of unified asm. I've been carrying >> this in my tree for quite a while and am reasonably happy that it is stable. >> I will watch out for any fallout in the coming weeks with this but it is >> better to take this now rather than later given we are hitting the end of >> stage1. >> >> Tested on arm-none-eabi - applied to trunk. >> >> > > I see a failure with an outdated check for the unified assembly. OK to fix ? > OK thanks. Ramana > >