similar to: [LLVMdev] Arm port

My goal is to have Cortex-A9 support complete in far less than three months. I've recently gotten some additional help toward that goal, so the pace should pick up soon. As far as compiler texts, there are many newer texts to recommend as just about all the major optimization passes are done differently after SSA-form appeared in about 1991. However, for adding Cortex-A8 support, I don't

Bob Wilson wrote: > On May 20, 2009, at 1:38 PM, Chuck Robey wrote: >> Hmm. Well, my motivation is that I recently bought a Pandora (it >> has the >> Cortex-A8). It's not going to arrive here for a couple more months, >> I think. >> When it does finally arrive, I want to be able to immediately begin >> work on >> replacing the Linux that

Sandeep Patel wrote: > My goal is to have Cortex-A9 support complete in far less than three > months. I've recently gotten some additional help toward that goal, so > the pace should pick up soon. > > As far as compiler texts, there are many newer texts to recommend as > just about all the major optimization passes are done differently > after SSA-form appeared in about

The Nokia N800 is an OMAP 2420 which is an ARM11. If you want an OMAP 3530 today, I think the cheapest route is the Beagleboard. deep On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 3:13 PM, Chuck Robey <chuckr at telenix.org> wrote: > Bob Wilson wrote: >> On May 20, 2009, at 1:38 PM, Chuck Robey wrote: >>> Hmm.  Well, my motivation is that I recently bought a Pandora (it >>> has the

Sandeep Patel wrote: > The Nokia N800 is an OMAP 2420 which is an ARM11. > > If you want an OMAP 3530 today, I think the cheapest route is the Beagleboard. Yeah, I see that now, about the N800. About the BeagleBoard, if you're going after an equivalent # of peripherals (screen and keyboard are things I wanted) then, really, I think that the Pandora is cheapest. I will say, without

Christophe Avoinne wrote: > Hi, > > - Cortex-A8 needs a specific instruction scheduler as dual issue forces > you to interleave some instructions to allow to run two instructions in > the same cycle for the best performance (Cortex-A9 is out-of-order so > dual issue is not an issue (!) for performance). > - Cortex-A8/A9 have several useful new instructions : for instance,

Hi, - Cortex-A8 needs a specific instruction scheduler as dual issue forces you to interleave some instructions to allow to run two instructions in the same cycle for the best performance (Cortex-A9 is out-of-order so dual issue is not an issue (!) for performance). - Cortex-A8/A9 have several useful new instructions : for instance, bit operations like bitfield insertion/extraction or having

I am currently working on support for the Cortex-A9, but as all compiler testing is more easily done on an Cortex-A8 today, A8 support is implicit. What specific ISA changes are you most interested in? Are you able to develop patches if we coordinate which areas to work on? deep On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 12:19 PM, Chuck Robey <chuckr at telenix.org> wrote: > If this is the wrong list,

Sandeep Patel wrote: > My goal is to have Cortex-A9 support complete in far less than three > months. I've recently gotten some additional help toward that goal, so > the pace should pick up soon. > > As far as compiler texts, there are many newer texts to recommend as > just about all the major optimization passes are done differently > after SSA-form appeared in about

Sandeep Patel wrote: > I am currently working on support for the Cortex-A9, but as all > compiler testing is more easily done on an Cortex-A8 today, A8 support > is implicit. > > What specific ISA changes are you most interested in? Are you able to > develop patches if we coordinate which areas to work on? Hmm. Well, my motivation is that I recently bought a Pandora (it has

Óscar Fuentes wrote: > Chuck Robey <chuckr at telenix.org> writes: > >>> Just checked that the makefiles generated by cmake work with `make' on >>> FreeBSD 7.2 x86. The build fails while building `opt' because libdl is >>> missing. >> They absolutely do work, even on FreeBSD-current( I run that here), >> but not using the native make (the

On May 20, 2009, at 1:38 PM, Chuck Robey wrote: > Hmm. Well, my motivation is that I recently bought a Pandora (it > has the > Cortex-A8). It's not going to arrive here for a couple more months, > I think. > When it does finally arrive, I want to be able to immediately begin > work on > replacing the Linux that comes pre-installed with FreeBSD-arm. Hi Chuck,

Óscar Fuentes wrote: > [snip] > >> Just to clarify things: have you *tried* to build LLVM with the >> makefiles generated by cmake on your BSD system? > > Just checked that the makefiles generated by cmake work with `make' on > FreeBSD 7.2 x86. The build fails while building `opt' because libdl is > missing. > They absolutely do work, even on

----- Original Message ---- > From: Chuck Robey <chuckr at telenix.org> > To: LLVM Developers Mailing List <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> > Sent: Friday, May 22, 2009 9:22:53 AM > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Arm port > > OK, I've got enough to go on with, and I'm getting ready right now to begin > reading the dragon book, but one question bothers me regarding the

Chuck Robey <chuckr at telenix.org> writes: >> Just checked that the makefiles generated by cmake work with `make' on >> FreeBSD 7.2 x86. The build fails while building `opt' because libdl is >> missing. > > They absolutely do work, even on FreeBSD-current( I run that here), > but not using the native make (the one built as part of "make world"

Chuck Robey <chuckr at telenix.org> writes: [snip] > Someone said that maybe CMake is already compatible with BSD make, so > I quicly went into one of your Makefiles and took out the first > incompatibility I found. Means ONLY that CMake != BSD Make, that's > all. Looks to me to be a great deal more like GNU Make, isn't that > so? As said on my previous reply to

On 2009-05-24 20:38, Chuck Robey wrote: > Óscar Fuentes wrote: > >> Chuck Robey <chuckr at telenix.org> writes: >> >> >>>> Just checked that the makefiles generated by cmake work with `make' on >>>> FreeBSD 7.2 x86. The build fails while building `opt' because libdl is >>>> missing. >>>>

Török Edwin wrote: > On 2009-05-24 20:38, Chuck Robey wrote: >> Óscar Fuentes wrote: >> >>> Chuck Robey <chuckr at telenix.org> writes: >>> >>> >>>>> Just checked that the makefiles generated by cmake work with `make' on >>>>> FreeBSD 7.2 x86. The build fails while building `opt' because libdl is

Motivation At the moment, when targeting armv7a, clang defaults to generate code as if -mcpu=cortex-a8 was specified. When targeting armv8a, it defaults to generate code as if -mcpu=cortex-a53 was specified. This leads to surprising code generation, by the compiler optimizing for a specific micro-architecture, whereas the intent from the user was probably to generate code that is

Samuel Crow wrote: > > > > > ----- Original Message ---- >> From: Chuck Robey <chuckr at telenix.org> >> To: LLVM Developers Mailing List <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> >> Sent: Friday, May 22, 2009 9:22:53 AM >> Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Arm port >> >> OK, I've got enough to go on with, and I'm getting ready right now to begin