From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10208 invoked by alias); 13 Feb 2014 18:23:58 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 10197 invoked by uid 89); 13 Feb 2014 18:23:57 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-4.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Thu, 13 Feb 2014 18:23:57 +0000 Received: from int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.24]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s1DINqs6027065 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 13 Feb 2014 13:23:52 -0500 Received: from anchor.twiddle.net (vpn-234-182.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.234.182]) by int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s1DINp1S010527; Thu, 13 Feb 2014 13:23:51 -0500 Message-ID: <52FD0DB6.1090001@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2014 18:23:00 -0000 From: Richard Henderson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Kyrill Tkachov , GCC Patches Subject: Re: [PATCH][RFC][libatomic] Override -mcpu option for arm linux ifunc targets References: <52EF829A.9010808@arm.com> In-Reply-To: <52EF829A.9010808@arm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2014-02/txt/msg00858.txt.bz2 On 02/03/2014 03:50 AM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: > +# For ARM, the -march option by itself conflicts with any -mcpu option that > +# we might end up passing to the build, causing an error. > +# Therefore we override the -mcpu option as well. > +# This shouldn't affect tuning much because the affected code is mostly > +# in inline assembly anyway. > @ARCH_ARM_LINUX_TRUE@@HAVE_IFUNC_TRUE@IFUNC_OPTIONS = -march=armv7-a -DHAVE_KERNEL64 > +@ARCH_ARM_LINUX_TRUE@@HAVE_IFUNC_TRUE@EXTRA_OVERRIDE = -mcpu=cortex-a9 Why would you want to split these across two different variables? It's easier to just add the -march and -mcpu to the same IFUNC_OPTIONS variable. Why the choice of cortext-a9, as opposed to any of the other v7-a possibilities? If we're going to force anything, perhaps generic-armv7-a is more appropriate? r~