From: Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>
To: will schmidt <will_schmidt@vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: GCC patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>,
David Edelsohn <dje.gcc@gmail.com>,
"Kewen.Lin" <linkw@linux.ibm.com>,
Michael Meissner <meissner@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH, rs6000] Split TARGET_POWER8 from TARGET_DIRECT_MOVE [PR101865] (2/2)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2022 11:52:29 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20221018165229.GK25951@gate.crashing.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f73c958c33ef2def7cf14450d4b0b8593de4d18c.camel@vnet.ibm.com>
Hi!
On Tue, Oct 18, 2022 at 10:17:30AM -0500, will schmidt wrote:
> On Mon, 2022-10-17 at 13:08 -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > It did not happen in GCC 9 obviously. Do you want to take a
> > shot? It
> > doesn't have to be all at once, it's probably best if not even -- as
> > I
> > wrote in the commit message, the flag always was used to mean
> > different
> > things.
>
> As long as it's OK to be removed, I'll certainly take a shot at it.
It is. Thanks!
> With that in mind that may simplify things for me here.
> I expect that
> anything currently guarded by DIRECT_MOVE should instead be guarded by
> POWER8.
Yes. Which works just as well for the places that actually check
whether the direct move insns can be used, and for everything else that
wants p8 :-)
> > > { "direct-move", OPTION_MASK_DIRECT_MOVE, false,
> > > true },
> > > + { "power8", OPTION_MASK_POWER8, fal
> > > se, true },
> >
> > Why would we want a #pragma power8 ?
>
> Hmm, thinko on my part, i'll reevaluate.
The existing "direct-move" is a historical thing, no something to copy
as an example of how things should be done :-)
Segher
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-10-18 16:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-09-19 16:05 [PATCH, rs6000] Tests of ARCH_PWR8 and -mno-vsx option. (1/2) will schmidt
2022-09-19 16:13 ` [PATCH, rs6000] Split TARGET_POWER8 from TARGET_DIRECT_MOVE [PR101865] (2/2) will schmidt
2022-10-13 16:07 ` will schmidt
2022-10-17 12:55 ` Kewen.Lin
2022-10-17 18:08 ` Segher Boessenkool
2022-10-18 15:17 ` will schmidt
2022-10-18 16:52 ` Segher Boessenkool [this message]
2022-10-19 2:36 ` Kewen.Lin
2024-04-07 16:14 ` Peter Bergner
2022-10-17 12:54 ` [PATCH, rs6000] Tests of ARCH_PWR8 and -mno-vsx option. (1/2) Kewen.Lin
2022-10-17 15:32 ` Segher Boessenkool
2022-10-17 16:54 ` will schmidt
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=20221018165229.GK25951@gate.crashing.org \
--to=segher@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=dje.gcc@gmail.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=linkw@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=meissner@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=will_schmidt@vnet.ibm.com \
/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: link
Be 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).