public inbox for gcc-cvs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tamar Christina <tnfchris@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-cvs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [gcc r14-5675] AArch64: only emit mismatch error when features would be disabled. Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2023 13:26:00 +0000 (GMT) [thread overview] Message-ID: <20231121132600.7E879385B513@sourceware.org> (raw) https://gcc.gnu.org/g:da332ce109451c8965cb64847934da154d7dcf94 commit r14-5675-gda332ce109451c8965cb64847934da154d7dcf94 Author: Tamar Christina <tamar.christina@arm.com> Date: Tue Nov 21 13:21:39 2023 +0000 AArch64: only emit mismatch error when features would be disabled. At the moment we emit a warning whenever you specify both -march and -mcpu and the architecture of them differ. The idea originally was that the user may not be aware of this change. However this has a few problems: 1. Architecture revisions is not an observable part of the architecture, extensions are. Starting with GCC 14 we have therefore relaxed the rule that all extensions can be enabled at any architecture level. Therefore it's incorrect, or at least not useful to keep the check on architecture. 2. It's problematic in Makefiles and other build systems, where you want to for certain files enable CPU specific builds. i.e. you may be by default building for -march=armv8-a but for some file for -mcpu=neoverse-n1. Since there's no easy way to remove the earlier options we end up warning and there's no way to disable just this warning. Build systems compiling with -Werror face an issue in this case that compiling with GCC is needlessly hard. 3. It doesn't actually warn for cases that may lead to issues, so e.g. -march=armv8.2-a+sve -mcpu=neoverse-n1 does not give a warning that SVE would be disabled. For this reason I have one of two proposals: 1. Just remove this warning all together. 2. Rework the warning based on extensions and only warn when features would be disabled by the presence of the -mcpu. This is the approach this patch has taken. As examples: > aarch64-none-linux-gnu-gcc -march=armv8.2-a+sve -mcpu=neoverse-n1 cc1: warning: switch ‘-mcpu=neoverse-n1’ conflicts with ‘-march=armv8.2-a+sve’ switch and resulted in options +crc+sve+norcpc+nodotprod being added .arch armv8.2-a+crc+sve > aarch64-none-linux-gnu-gcc -march=armv8.2-a -mcpu=neoverse-n1 > aarch64-none-linux-gnu-gcc -march=armv8.2-a+dotprod -mcpu=neoverse-n1 > aarch64-none-linux-gnu-gcc -march=armv8.2-a+dotprod -mcpu=neoverse-n2 <no warning> The one remaining issue here is that if both -march and -mcpu are specified we pick the -march. This is not particularly obvious and for the use case to be more useful I think it makes sense to pick the CPU's arch? I did not make that change in the patch as it changes semantics. Note that I can't write a test for this because dg-warning expects warnings to be at a particular line and doesn't support warnings at the "global" level. gcc/ChangeLog: * config/aarch64/aarch64.cc (aarch64_override_options): Rework warnings. Diff: --- gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.cc | 20 +++++++++++++++----- 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.cc b/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.cc index c4117c6c917..f6f6f94bf43 100644 --- a/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.cc +++ b/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.cc @@ -16436,12 +16436,22 @@ aarch64_override_options (void) if (cpu && arch) { /* If both -mcpu and -march are specified, warn if they are not - architecturally compatible and prefer the -march ISA flags. */ - if (arch->arch != cpu->arch) - { - warning (0, "switch %<-mcpu=%s%> conflicts with %<-march=%s%> switch", + feature compatible. feature compatible means that the inclusion of the + cpu features would end up disabling an achitecture feature. In + otherwords the cpu features need to be a strict superset of the arch + features and if so prefer the -march ISA flags. */ + auto full_arch_flags = arch->flags | arch_isa; + auto full_cpu_flags = cpu->flags | cpu_isa; + if (~full_cpu_flags & full_arch_flags) + { + std::string ext_diff + = aarch64_get_extension_string_for_isa_flags (full_arch_flags, + full_cpu_flags); + warning (0, "switch %<-mcpu=%s%> conflicts with %<-march=%s%> switch " + "and resulted in options %<%s%> being added", aarch64_cpu_string, - aarch64_arch_string); + aarch64_arch_string, + ext_diff.c_str ()); } selected_arch = arch->arch;
reply other threads:[~2023-11-21 13:26 UTC|newest] Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=20231121132600.7E879385B513@sourceware.org \ --to=tnfchris@gcc.gnu.org \ --cc=gcc-cvs@gcc.gnu.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).