This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

RE: FW: [PATCH 2/2] ARM: Improve fenv implementation


On Mon, 19 May 2014, Wilco wrote:

> > Joseph Myers wrote: 
> > This breaks the build when VFP isn't enabled at compile-time, because then
> > the libc_* functions aren't defined.  You need to have the <fenv.h>
> > functions conditionally call libc_* functions that always use VFP (and are
> > always defined), while those VFP-using functions are only conditionally
> > used within the rest of libm.  I.e., I think the __SOFTFP__ conditionals
> > in fenv_private.h should only control the definitions of libc_* to use
> > libc_*_vfp, not the definitions of the libc_*_vfp inlines.
> 
> You're right, it wouldn't build properly. I'll move the #ifndef __SOFTFP__
> to go just before the defines and add the reverted patch to my outstanding 
> patch set.
> 
> Any chance we can obsolete softfp only builds any time soon? I can't
> remember when the last non-VFP ARM was made, but it must have been at
> least a decade ago... Are those NetWinder boards still working/in use?

That would be very premature.  You still get people building glibc for v4 
(not v4T) although only v4T and above are really expected to work properly 
for EABI.  VFP is still optional in v7 (without the "only for 
implementations targeting specialised markets" caveat of v8); my 
impression was that there are Cortex-A9 processors without VFP, for 
example.

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]