public inbox for gcc@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com>
To: Mike Stump <mrs@apple.com>
Cc: Geoff Keating <geoffk@geoffk.org>,
	mark@codesourcery.com, steby@enea.se, gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: GCC floating point usage
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2002 13:43:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20021016201445.GC22988@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0638B6F4-E09D-11D6-8136-000393941EE6@apple.com>

On Tue, Oct 15, 2002 at 05:20:07PM -0700, Mike Stump wrote:
> A routine that is compiled with no-implicit-fp is valid to use in a 
> no-FP task, provided there is no explicit fp in it.  A routine that 
> isn't compiled with this flag isn't valid to use in a non-FP task.

No, that's not correct.

A routine that doesn't use FP is valid to use in a no-FP task.

A routine that does use explicit fp is not valid to use in a no-FP task.


I think that the proper solution to this to have a mode in which
the compiler does not *prefer* to use FP registers for integral
data.  But the assembler would set a bit if any FP registers are
used, which would then be collected by the linker to indicate
whether or not the process as a whole uses FP registers.

In this way, if gcc does happen to use an FP register, due to
queer register pressure/preferencing, then we're still ok, because
the process *is* marked as an FP process.

Anything less is asking for trouble.

The only other solution is to use -msoft-float.  The argument that
that changes calling conventions is nonsense -- given that this 
is supposed to be a no-FP process, we've already established that
we're not supposed to be using FP whatsoever.



r~

  parent reply	other threads:[~2002-10-16 20:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2002-10-14  9:59 Stefan Bylund
2002-10-14 10:16 ` David Edelsohn
2002-10-14 10:25   ` Zack Weinberg
2002-10-14 10:55     ` Dale Johannesen
2002-10-14 22:22     ` Mark Mitchell
2002-10-15 15:35       ` Geoff Keating
2002-10-15 16:10         ` Mark Mitchell
2002-10-15 17:20           ` Geoff Keating
2002-10-15 18:09             ` Mark Mitchell
2002-10-16  7:40               ` Joel Sherrill
2002-10-15 19:04             ` Mike Stump
2002-10-16 12:06               ` Mark Mitchell
2002-10-16 13:35                 ` Geoff Keating
2002-10-16 14:29                   ` Mark Mitchell
2002-10-16 14:56                     ` Michael Matz
2002-10-16 15:03                       ` Mark Mitchell
2002-10-16 15:27                         ` David Edelsohn
2002-10-16 15:36                           ` Mark Mitchell
2002-10-16 16:35                             ` Zack Weinberg
2002-10-16 16:36                               ` Mark Mitchell
2002-10-16 16:46                             ` David Edelsohn
2002-10-17  8:37                             ` Paul Koning
2002-10-16 17:57                           ` Mike Stump
2002-10-17  4:12                   ` Mike Stump
2002-10-16 13:43               ` Richard Henderson [this message]
2002-10-16 14:35                 ` Mark Mitchell
2002-10-16 14:56                   ` Joel Sherrill
2002-10-16 16:38                   ` Richard Henderson
2002-10-16 16:53                     ` Zack Weinberg
2002-10-16 17:52                       ` Michael Matz
2002-10-16 22:50                       ` Richard Henderson
2002-10-21 12:21                         ` Jeff Law
2002-10-16 17:29                 ` Mike Stump
2002-10-17  2:19                   ` Richard Henderson
2002-10-15 17:19         ` Mike Stump
2002-10-15 18:41         ` Zack Weinberg
2002-10-16  1:48           ` Fergus Henderson
2002-10-14 10:37   ` Stefan Bylund
2002-10-14 11:28     ` Mike Stump
2002-10-14 12:39       ` Joel Sherrill

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=20021016201445.GC22988@redhat.com \
    --to=rth@redhat.com \
    --cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=geoffk@geoffk.org \
    --cc=mark@codesourcery.com \
    --cc=mrs@apple.com \
    --cc=steby@enea.se \
    /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).