On 12/21/18 6:32 AM, Joseph Myers wrote: > On Fri, 21 Dec 2018, Vineet Gupta wrote: > >> is due to linkage of a generic libgcc routine fp-bit.c > > I'd suggest moving from fp-bit to soft-fp in libgcc (soft-fp is a lot > faster, see the 2006 GCC Summit proceedings, though of course you may wish > to do your own benchmarking on ARC), which would probably avoid that issue It seems the we have "assisted" soft-fp: hand tweaked assembler written originally by Joern, so he and/or Claudiu can advise on that. Although the asm was tweaked for prev core/micro-architecture it should likely be faster than generic "C" code I presume. > (though if very concerned about about code size, soft-fp is a bit larger). Not for glibc :-) (uClibc is a different story, but it seems with largers RAMs and disks size is kind of becoming moot unless deeply embedded. > But the "?" in localplt.data would still make sense as long as the GCC > versions using fp-bit there are supported for building the ARC glibc port. Right, added that already. _______________________________________________ linux-snps-arc mailing list linux-snps-arc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-snps-arc
