Hello, On Fri, 18 Aug 2017 00:19:31 +0200, Ralf Baechle wrote: > > Despite the theory being simple, wiring this up will take time as it also > > involves getting the costing calculations updated. > > > > Please can you submit it as a GCC bug? > > Will do. > > > As a workaround you may want to include a version of __multi3 in the kernel > > until it is resolved. > > Yes, working on that. This has been made harder by the fact that the > implementation of __umulti3 is well hidden in the source :) I now have > functioning implementation of __multi3 but it's still too ugly to be > committed to the kernel. > > And while I agree it should be fixed in GCC at the same time the > generated code while convoluted and unnecessarily slow appears to be > correct so I think we should support this by adding a suitable __umulti3 > to the kernel code as you suggest. Has there been any progress on solving this issue ? Either on the GCC side or the kernel side ? Thanks a lot! Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering http://free-electrons.com
