From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16457 invoked by alias); 5 Jun 2012 20:08:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 16387 invoked by uid 22791); 5 Jun 2012 20:08:25 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.3 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_THREADED,T_FRT_LOLITA1 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from localhost (HELO gcc.gnu.org) (127.0.0.1) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 05 Jun 2012 20:08:12 +0000 From: "olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug target/53511] SH Target: Add support for fma patterns Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2012 20:08:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: target X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2012-06/txt/msg00269.txt.bz2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53511 --- Comment #7 from Oleg Endo 2012-06-05 20:08:08 UTC --- > (In reply to comment #4) > > Make -mfused-madd no-op instead to remove for the backward > compatibility. Sorry, I don't quite follow. According to my understanding we have something like the following... (A): New behavior (attachment 27558, using common gcc/config/fused-madd.opt) (B): Old behavior (C): New behavior, with -mfused-madd being a nop | | (A) | (B) | (C) 1st option | 2nd option | fma pat. | fmac pat.| fma pat. (new) | | (new) | (old) | (mfused-madd = nop) =================+==================+==========+==========+================== | -ffp-contract= | 1 | 0 | 1 | | | | -----------------+------------------+----------+----------+------------------ | -fpp-contract=off| 0 | 0 | 0 -----------------+------------------+----------+----------+------------------ -mfused-madd | -ffp-contract= | 1 | 1 | 1 | | | | -----------------+------------------+----------+----------+------------------ -mno-fused-madd | -ffp-contract= | 0 | 0 | 0 | | | | -----------------+------------------+----------+----------+------------------ -mfused-madd | -fpp-contract=off| 0 | 1 | 0 -----------------+------------------+----------+----------+------------------ -mno-fused-madd | -fpp-contract=off| 0 | 0 | 0 -----------------+------------------+----------+----------+------------------ -fpp-contract=off| -mfused-madd | 1 | 1 | 0 (*) -----------------+------------------+----------+----------+------------------ -fpp-contract=off| -mno-fused-madd | 0 | 0 | 0 -----------------+------------------+----------+----------+------------------ My intention was to avoid having any special -mfused-madd handling in the SH target code and to re-use the existing common gcc/config/fused-madd.opt. Making -mfused-madd a no-op with special handling will only differ in the (*) marked case. Is this what you had in mind?