From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16867 invoked by alias); 31 Jul 2002 14:53:07 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 16858 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2002 14:53:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO crack.them.org) (65.125.64.184) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 31 Jul 2002 14:53:05 -0000 Received: from dsl254-114-118.nyc1.dsl.speakeasy.net ([216.254.114.118] helo=nevyn.them.org ident=mail) by crack.them.org with asmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 17ZuqU-0007pg-00; Wed, 31 Jul 2002 09:53:02 -0500 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 17ZuqV-0008Gq-00; Wed, 31 Jul 2002 10:53:03 -0400 Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2002 08:09:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: John David Anglin Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: RFC: New approach to --with-cpu Message-ID: <20020731145302.GB31591@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: John David Anglin , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org References: <20020731034732.GA12480@nevyn.them.org> <200207311446.g6VEkpug022189@hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200207311446.g6VEkpug022189@hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-SW-Source: 2002-07/txt/msg01872.txt.bz2 On Wed, Jul 31, 2002 at 10:46:50AM -0400, John David Anglin wrote: > > Well, that's no problem. A first cut of this patch offered defaults > > for -march= and -mtune= separately on MIPS. I could do the same for > > PA easily. > > I would be happy if the configure option for setting the default > scheduling was "--with-schedule" rather than "--with-cpu". This > will set the default for -mschedule=. Similarly, when an option > is introduced to set the default arch, then I would like to use > "--with-arch". > > Using the same suffix in the configure and gcc options makes the > relationship between the two options clearer. I was actually debating this. The advantage of using --with-cpu for all targets is consistency across architectures. The advantage of saying --with-schedule, --with-arch, --with-tune is flexibility. I lean towards consistency, but I could be persuaded either way - does anyone else have an opinion? I suppose using --with-schedule on PA would also mean we could have --with-arch, which is nice. -- Daniel Jacobowitz Carnegie Mellon University MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer