Tim Northover
2014-Mar-31 19:55 UTC
[LLVMdev] Contributing the Apple ARM64 compiler backend
> *nod*. That's most of what we needed for ARM as well. Should probably > conditionalize it on os darwin for now until it's tested more with a > command line?I'd almost prefer to leave it in for the bugs to be discovered (perhaps after some simple tests of our own). ARM went wirthout FastISel support on Linux for years simply because it was declared Darwin-only. Tim.
Eric Christopher
2014-Mar-31 19:56 UTC
[LLVMdev] Contributing the Apple ARM64 compiler backend
On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 12:55 PM, Tim Northover <t.p.northover at gmail.com> wrote:>> *nod*. That's most of what we needed for ARM as well. Should probably >> conditionalize it on os darwin for now until it's tested more with a >> command line? > > I'd almost prefer to leave it in for the bugs to be discovered > (perhaps after some simple tests of our own). ARM went wirthout > FastISel support on Linux for years simply because it was declared > Darwin-only. >I'm not against this either. Merely throwing out suggestions :) -eric
Renato Golin
2014-Mar-31 20:01 UTC
[LLVMdev] Contributing the Apple ARM64 compiler backend
On 31 March 2014 20:55, Tim Northover <t.p.northover at gmail.com> wrote:> I'd almost prefer to leave it in for the bugs to be discovered > (perhaps after some simple tests of our own). ARM went wirthout > FastISel support on Linux for years simply because it was declared > Darwin-only.Given the unique opportunity we have now, I'd say we should at least give it a try. --renato
On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 1:01 PM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org>wrote:> On 31 March 2014 20:55, Tim Northover <t.p.northover at gmail.com> wrote: > > I'd almost prefer to leave it in for the bugs to be discovered > > (perhaps after some simple tests of our own). ARM went wirthout > > FastISel support on Linux for years simply because it was declared > > Darwin-only. > > Given the unique opportunity we have now, I'd say we should at least > give it a try. >I'm not sure I understand what you're proposing: check in with FastISel turned on for Linux, or off? I'd be afraid of bitrot if it's off, which was the main issue on the ARM side because code got added assuming Linux would work the same. Does it pass the tests on Linux with FastISel, or do we at least understand what's missing? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20140331/f9dc97c5/attachment.html>