triples for baremetal

[Saleem Abdulrasool]

On Jun 17, 2014, at 9:45 AM, Jonathan Roelofs <jonathan at codesourcery.com> wrote:

> [+llvm-dev, cfe-dev]
> 
> Was "Re: [PATCH] ARM: allow inline atomics on Cortex M"
> 
> On 6/17/14, 10:42 AM, Jonathan Roelofs wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> On 6/17/14, 9:35 AM, Renato Golin wrote:
>>> On 17 June 2014 16:29, Jonathan Roelofs <jonathan at codesourcery.com> wrote:
>>>> Attached is what I now think the patch ought to be.
>>> 
>>> Does unknownOS *always* mean bare-metal?
>> I'm not sure. It might be a good time to fork this thread, and start another
>> about triples for bare-metal...
> 
> Personally, I think we ought to add a 'None' entry to the OSType enum specifically for baremetal, and then map triples like arm-none-eabi and arm--eabi to it (but not arm-foobar-eabi, for example).
> 
> Thoughts?

Am I mistaken in that this is currently modeled as the following triple: {<arch>, <vendor>, Invalid, <environment>}.  To help clarify what I mean, consider the following armv4 baremetal eabi target: armv7---eabi.  It is arguably less than ideal for typing, but, it *should* work.

IIRC, config.sub uses unknown for the vendor field, and none for the os field, so the use of none may not be that bad.
 
> Jon
> 
>>> 
>>> --renato
>>> 
>> 
> 
> -- 
> Jon Roelofs
> jonathan at codesourcery.com
> CodeSourcery / Mentor Embedded
> _______________________________________________
> cfe-commits mailing list
> cfe-commits at cs.uiuc.edu
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v1/url?u=http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits&k=ZVNjlDMF0FElm4dQtryO4A%3D%3D%0A&r=CchYc4lrV44%2BZqxZADw0BQ%3D%3D%0A&m=EtxBhAsh5u2%2Fy9EeCRPHfDJd23IeBTedTCCwe6oFBr0%3D%0A&s=a2be93cd3b4fe320ada248dd6e1d03dd829ed49c63fa8edb832bb3b315c96a01

-- 
Saleem Abdulrasool
abdulras (at) fb (dot) com