From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-424087-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 11961 invoked by alias); 10 Jun 2013 08:04:48 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 11917 invoked by uid 48); 10 Jun 2013 08:04:43 -0000
From: "christophe.beausoleil at sogeti dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug other/57482] [4.7.3][AVR] --help=optimizers reports a wrong list
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2013 08:04:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: other
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.7.3
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: christophe.beausoleil at sogeti dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-57482-4-BxW29soefa@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-57482-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-57482-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2013-06/txt/msg00466.txt.bz2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57482

--- Comment #3 from Christophe <christophe.beausoleil at sogeti dot com> ---
> 2) -f[no-]short-enums is not an optimization option;

Hum, I do not really agree although it is strongly related to ABI, no doubt.
Anyway, it is a very special option as I can see in opts.c :
  /* Set this to a special "uninitialized" value.  The actual default
     is set after target options have been processed.  */
  opts->x_flag_short_enums = 2;

A few specific options are also treated here, but it seems to me that
-fshort-enum is the only optimization option concerned. Am I wrong ? Could it
be the only option which is not reported correctly by --help=optimizers ?

Reading target.def is really instructive, but I still do not understand (yet)
how the optimizations list is built, and how options are overwritten... All
this is very confusing.