[cfe-dev] [PATCH] Add preliminary Alpha support

[Matt Turner]

On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 10:36 AM, Eli Friedman <eli.friedman at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 5:57 AM, Matt Turner <mattst88 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 4:48 PM, Andrew Lenharth <andrewl at lenharth.org> wrote:
>>> On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 3:40 PM, Matt Turner <mattst88 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Signed-off-by: Matt Turner <mattst88 at gmail.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> So LLVM's Alpha backend works, somewhat. It generates code that segfaults at
>>>> any optimization level except -O0, but this is a start at reviving it.
>>>
>>> The patch looks good, but I haven't looked at clang stuff for quite a
>>> while.  Others can comment more here.
>>>
>>>> Things I'm unsure about:
>>>>        DescriptionString - I think everything is natually aligned, but the MIPS
>>>>        desc string I looked at specified 32-bit alignment for 8 and 16-bit units.
>>>>
>>>>        getDefaultFeatures - This seems to be where ISA additions should be created,
>>>>        or something, but I see 'FIXME: This should not be here.' in other arch's
>>>>        code. So, what goes here?
>>>
>>> If your assumption is correct, then probably nothing.  I took 21164
>>> support out a few years ago, so only 21264 features are supported.
>>>
>>>>        getTargetDefines - I don't know what this function does. Sets what the
>>>>        preprocessor is supposed to define? gcc defines __alpha__ and some other
>>>>        things dependent on features supported. Should these things be defined here?
>>>>
>>>>        getTargetBuiltins - No idea what this is.
>>>
>>> I would assume things like:
>>> __builtin_alpha_mskwh
>>> __builtin_alpha_minub8
>>>
>>>>        validateAsmConstraint - I think this is for validating inline assembly inputs
>>>>        and outputs? If so, this shouldn't be a problem.
>>>
>>> Yes.  I think you should only need to check INT/FP ness to validate most asm.
>>>
>>>>        getClobbers - Must be for inline assembly. The only relevant comments I see
>>>>        in other code is '// FIXME: Is this really right?', so not terribly helpful.
>>>
>>> There shouldn't be hidden clobbers, so this doesn't seem too bad.
>>
>> Thanks for the review. Since there don't seem to be any NAKs, can we
>> commit this and I'll send follow-up patches to fill out things like
>> validateAsmConstraint?
>
> Feel free to commit this.
>
> -Eli

Great. What do I have to do to get commit access?

Thanks,
Matt