From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 63808 invoked by alias); 16 Mar 2017 20:38:46 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 63788 invoked by uid 89); 16 Mar 2017 20:38:46 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=Hx-languages-length:1314 X-HELO: relay1.mentorg.com Received: from relay1.mentorg.com (HELO relay1.mentorg.com) (192.94.38.131) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Thu, 16 Mar 2017 20:38:45 +0000 Received: from nat-ies.mentorg.com ([192.94.31.2] helo=svr-ies-mbx-01.mgc.mentorg.com) by relay1.mentorg.com with esmtp id 1cocAT-0005gl-CC from Andrew_Jenner@mentor.com ; Thu, 16 Mar 2017 13:38:41 -0700 Received: from [IPv6:::1] (137.202.0.87) by svr-ies-mbx-01.mgc.mentorg.com (139.181.222.1) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1210.3; Thu, 16 Mar 2017 20:38:34 +0000 Subject: Re: Obsolete powerpc*-*-*spe* To: Segher Boessenkool References: <58A61E7B.4060903@codesourcery.com> <20170216221937.GB21840@gate.crashing.org> <58A63B91.1040102@codesourcery.com> <452E2837-FC8A-4DA2-A2B9-F58151841F58@adacore.com> <45cf27b1-2e27-460c-cb32-3be93f16b6d2@codesourcery.com> <20170315142623.GN4402@gate.crashing.org> <20170316192439.GQ4402@gate.crashing.org> CC: Olivier Hainque , David Edelsohn , GCC Development , Sandra Loosemore , Arnaud Charlet , Joel Brobecker From: Andrew Jenner Message-ID: Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 20:38:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20170316192439.GQ4402@gate.crashing.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-ClientProxiedBy: svr-ies-mbx-01.mgc.mentorg.com (139.181.222.1) To svr-ies-mbx-01.mgc.mentorg.com (139.181.222.1) X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2017-03/txt/msg00098.txt.bz2 Hi Segher, On 16/03/2017 19:24, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > e500mc (like e5500, e6500) are just PowerPC (and they use the usual ABIs), > so those should stay on the "rs6000 side". Agreed. >> Are you proposing to take on the task of actually splitting it yourself? >> If so, that would make me a lot happier about it. > > Yes, I can do the mechanics. But I cannot do most of the testing. That's fine (and what I expected). > And > this does not include any of the huge simplifications that can be done > after the split: both ports will be very close to what we have now, > immediately after the split. I'd have thought that the simplifications would be the bulk of the work... The simplification of the classic PowerPC port would be the removal of the SPE code. What would be removed from the SPE port - anything other than Altivec and 64-bit? >> All the e200 cores apart from e200z0 can execute 32-bit instructions as >> well as VLE, though we'll always generate VLE code when targetting them >> (otherwise they're fairly standard). > > Do any e200 support SPE, or classic FP? The e200z3 upwards have SPE units. None of them have classic FP. So it would make most sense for the e200/VLE support to be part of the SPE backend rather than the classic PowerPC backend. Andrew