search for: d21069

...9; and select the appropriate default behaviour. I assume this will be upstreamed in the near future. > Also, do you plan to deprecate the other ways of passing mips abi info > and use only a normalized triple? If so I am OK with adding these > extra triples. Yes, http://reviews.llvm.org/D21069 makes it mandatory to pass the ABI in the triple. > Eric, what do you think? > > Cheers, > Rafael

...solving the same key problem as enabling IAS for just N64). I therefore want to separate the two ABI's so that I can finish off N64 and then fix N32 afterwards. I've posted a series of patches that allow us to distinguish N32 and N64 so that we can enable IAS for only N64 (D21465, D21467, D21069 for LLVM along with D21070, D21072 for clang). During the review of D21467, Rafael asked me to explain my approach here. I'm hoping that people will agree that this is an acceptable approach to take and that it's no different from how other targets handle certain ABI's and how we alread...

On 24 June 2016 at 06:02, Daniel Sanders <Daniel.Sanders at imgtec.com> wrote: > Hi, > > Having recently enabled IAS by default for the MIPS O32 ABI, I'm now trying to do the same thing for the MIPS N64 ABI. Unfortunately, it is not currently possible to enable IAS by default for the N64 ABI without also enabling it for the N32 ABI because this information is not reflected in

...solving the same key problem as enabling IAS for just N64). I therefore want to separate the two ABI's so that I can finish off N64 and then fix N32 afterwards. I've posted a series of patches that allow us to distinguish N32 and N64 so that we can enable IAS for only N64 (D21465, D21467, D21069 for LLVM along with D21070, D21072 for clang). During the review of D21467, Rafael asked me to explain my approach here. I'm hoping that people will agree that this is an acceptable approach to take and that it's no different from how other targets handle certain ABI's and how we alread...