This is the mail archive of the crossgcc@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the crossgcc project.
See the CrossGCC FAQ for lots more information.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
Glynn Smith wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > From: Aaron J. Grier [mailto:aaron@frye.com] > Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2002 10:59 AM > To: Glynn Smith > Cc: crossgcc@sourceware.cygnus.com > Subject: Re: Multilib support for 68040 > > On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 12:26:18PM -0800, Glynn Smith wrote: > > I am using gcc 2.95.2 configured as a Cross m68k compiler hosted on > > PPC-LINUX. The standard multi-lib support seems to be for 68000 68020 > > 68881 & soft-float. > > and cpu32 and m5200. :) > > > Question 1 > > > > Can this version or a later version of the GCC compiler be configured > > so that it generates a 68040 multilib branch uses only floating point > > instruction from the set of instructions that are supported by the > > 68040 FPCP and does NOT emulate the unsupported instructions using > > FLINE TRAPS > > according to the documentation for 2.95.2, yes: > > `-m68040' > Generate output for a 68040. This is the default when the > compiler is configured for 68040-based systems. > Where is this default configured and how do I see what my default is? > > This option inhibits the use of 68881/68882 instructions that have > to be emulated by software on the 68040. Use this option if your > 68040 does not have code to emulate those instructions. > How do I configure the compiler for multilib support for -m68040 so that > libraries get built with this option? I have cc'ed Chris Johns since this is the same thing his 68060 patches do for that CPU. > > Question 2 > > Motorola FPCPs have the option of setting them up so that the floating > > point precession is embedded in each floating point instruction rather > > that setting the precession in the FPCR (Control register) before each > > operation. Is there a compiler flag to enable this option? > > I have no idea. have you disassembled code to see what the compiler > default is? My guess would be to doubt it since there would have to be a way in the programming language to specify the precision for the compiler to use. I suppose gcc could vary it on a file by file basis but this feels questionable. > -- > Aaron J. Grier | Frye Electronics, Tigard, OR | aaron@frye.com > "In a few thousand years people will be scratching their heads > wondering how on earth the first computer was invented and > bootstrapped without a prior computer to do it with." > -- Chris Malcolm, on comp.arch > > ------ > Want more information? See the CrossGCC FAQ, http://www.objsw.com/CrossGCC/ > Want to unsubscribe? Send a note to crossgcc-unsubscribe@sources.redhat.com -- Joel Sherrill, Ph.D. Director of Research & Development joel@OARcorp.com On-Line Applications Research Ask me about RTEMS: a free RTOS Huntsville AL 35805 Support Available (256) 722-9985 ------ Want more information? See the CrossGCC FAQ, http://www.objsw.com/CrossGCC/ Want to unsubscribe? Send a note to crossgcc-unsubscribe@sources.redhat.com
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |