This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: [Patch]Extend GAS arm_feature_set struct to provide more available bits
- From: Alan Modra <amodra at gmail dot com>
- To: Terry Guo <flameroc at gmail dot com>
- Cc: Terry Guo <terry dot guo at arm dot com>, binutils at sourceware dot org, Richard Earnshaw <Richard dot Earnshaw at arm dot com>, Ramana Radhakrishnan <ramana dot radhakrishnan at arm dot com>, Nicholas Clifton <nickc at redhat dot com>
- Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2015 22:18:57 +1030
- Subject: Re: [Patch]Extend GAS arm_feature_set struct to provide more available bits
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <007001d0572b$922edf60$b68c9e20$ at arm dot com> <54FECF9B dot 9010602 at redhat dot com> <CAGbRaL6Ypk7U1Tr8RW2atLjA6A+7N2+sEz6j-M7b4BME_4asjw at mail dot gmail dot com> <20150316074237 dot GC12856 at bubble dot grove dot modra dot org> <CAGbRaL6HiBoESpiwXAmQ3WVSKgKfii=QPRzr9k5YqDtVjAMt-w at mail dot gmail dot com>
On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 04:27:04PM +0800, Terry Guo wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 3:42 PM, Alan Modra <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 02:43:01PM +0800, Terry Guo wrote:
> >> I am also curious here. As you can see from below URL, the default
> >> mode for gcc 4.7 and 4.8 is still c90 which doesn't support long long.
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Long-Long.html
> > Note "as an extension GCC supports them in C90 mode".
> Thanks Alan. So in your opinion can we say it is safe to use long long
> here? Will there be any other subtle performance issue if we use long
I was really just replying to your comments about gcc and C90.
I don't want to get into a stoush with the ARM maintainers. :)
But now that I've looked at your patch, I'd be inclined to
#include "bfd_stdint.h" and use uint64_t for the bitmask.
Australia Development Lab, IBM