gcc-4.5: Sync from OE

Remove unneeded patches. This should bring all the changes from OE
uptodate. Now we are left with syncing the changes from oe-core
then we will ready to push it into oe-core.

Signed-off-by: Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Koen Kooi <koen@dominion.thruhere.net>

1 files changed, 101 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/recipes-devtools/gcc/gcc-4.5/linaro/gcc-4.5-linaro-r99479.patch b/recipes-devtools/gcc/gcc-4.5/linaro/gcc-4.5-linaro-r99479.patch
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..2920466d8f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/recipes-devtools/gcc/gcc-4.5/linaro/gcc-4.5-linaro-r99479.patch
@@ -0,0 +1,101 @@
+2011-02-24  Chung-Lin Tang  <cltang@codesourcery.com>
+
+        Backport from FSF mainline:
+
+        2010-08-10  Bernd Schmidt  <bernds@codesourcery.com>
+
+        PR bootstrap/45177
+        * config/arm/arm.c (multiple_operation_profitable_p): Move xscale
+        test here from arm_gen_load_multiple_1.
+        (arm_gen_load_multiple_1, arm_gen_store_multiple_1): Use
+        multiple_operation_profitable_p.
+
+=== modified file 'gcc/config/arm/arm.c'
+--- old/gcc/config/arm/arm.c    2011-02-22 11:38:56 +0000
++++ new/gcc/config/arm/arm.c    2011-02-24 17:30:32 +0000
+@@ -9728,6 +9728,36 @@
+   if (nops == 2 && arm_ld_sched && add_offset != 0)
+     return false;
+ 
++  /* XScale has load-store double instructions, but they have stricter
++     alignment requirements than load-store multiple, so we cannot
++     use them.
++
++     For XScale ldm requires 2 + NREGS cycles to complete and blocks
++     the pipeline until completion.
++
++       NREGS           CYCLES
++         1               3
++         2               4
++         3               5
++         4               6
++
++     An ldr instruction takes 1-3 cycles, but does not block the
++     pipeline.
++
++       NREGS           CYCLES
++         1              1-3
++         2              2-6
++         3              3-9
++         4              4-12
++
++     Best case ldr will always win.  However, the more ldr instructions
++     we issue, the less likely we are to be able to schedule them well.
++     Using ldr instructions also increases code size.
++
++     As a compromise, we use ldr for counts of 1 or 2 regs, and ldm
++     for counts of 3 or 4 regs.  */
++  if (nops <= 2 && arm_tune_xscale && !optimize_size)
++    return false;
+   return true;
+ }
+ 
+@@ -10086,35 +10116,7 @@
+   int i = 0, j;
+   rtx result;
+ 
+-  /* XScale has load-store double instructions, but they have stricter
+-     alignment requirements than load-store multiple, so we cannot
+-     use them.
+-
+-     For XScale ldm requires 2 + NREGS cycles to complete and blocks
+-     the pipeline until completion.
+-
+-       NREGS           CYCLES
+-         1               3
+-         2               4
+-         3               5
+-         4               6
+-
+-     An ldr instruction takes 1-3 cycles, but does not block the
+-     pipeline.
+-
+-       NREGS           CYCLES
+-         1              1-3
+-         2              2-6
+-         3              3-9
+-         4              4-12
+-
+-     Best case ldr will always win.  However, the more ldr instructions
+-     we issue, the less likely we are to be able to schedule them well.
+-     Using ldr instructions also increases code size.
+-
+-     As a compromise, we use ldr for counts of 1 or 2 regs, and ldm
+-     for counts of 3 or 4 regs.  */
+-  if (low_irq_latency || (arm_tune_xscale && count <= 2 && ! optimize_size))
++  if (low_irq_latency || !multiple_operation_profitable_p (false, count, 0))
+     {
+       rtx seq;
+ 
+@@ -10166,9 +10168,7 @@
+   if (GET_CODE (basereg) == PLUS)
+     basereg = XEXP (basereg, 0);
+ 
+-  /* See arm_gen_load_multiple_1 for discussion of
+-     the pros/cons of ldm/stm usage for XScale.  */
+-  if (low_irq_latency || (arm_tune_xscale && count <= 2 && ! optimize_size))
++  if (low_irq_latency || !multiple_operation_profitable_p (false, count, 0))
+     {
+       rtx seq;
+ 
+