<div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr">On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 7:39 AM Sven Barth via fpc-devel <<a href="mailto:fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org">fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div>
<div>Am 30.03.2020 um 22:07 schrieb Christo
Crause via fpc-devel:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sun, Mar 29, 2020 at
11:00 PM Florian Klämpfl <<a href="mailto:florian@freepascal.org" target="_blank">florian@freepascal.org</a>>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">Am 29.03.20 um 22:46
schrieb Christo Crause via fpc-devel:<br>
> It seems that a different instruction sequence should
be used for sign <br>
> extension for the lx106 subarch.<br>
<br>
Ok, I see. Let me first integrate everything done so far in
trunk, then <br>
we can continue with the details :)<br>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I've noticed GCC uses the SLLI + SRAI instructions to
perform sign extension on ESP8266.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Since different CPUs can support different subsets of the
Xtensa instructions do you think a finalizecode type
function can be used as a post code generation step to map
unsupported instructions to alternative sequences?<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
These are simply different CPU types (-CpXXX or selected by the
controller type) which the code generator will handle accordingly.
Just like it's done with ARM, AVR and all other platforms.</div></blockquote><div> </div><div>Make sense. The make files are not current set up like that for xtensa. I'll make a patch to make xtensa-embedded work like avr etc with regards to subarch. This will then make it easier to check for cpu_capabilities in the compiler.<br></div></div></div>