From: Kelvin Nilsen <kdnilsen@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH,rs6000] Handle conflicting target options -mno-power9-vector and -mcpu=power9
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2017 23:56:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <637d9e0f-a8b0-88d0-91d9-e8aba5e2d7f3@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170322233535.GM4402@gate.crashing.org>
On 03/22/2017 05:35 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 11:44:49AM -0600, Kelvin Nilsen wrote:
>> Internal testing recently revealed that use of the -mno-power9-vector
>> target option in combination with the -mcpu=power9 target option
>> results in termination of gcc with the error message:
>>
>> power9-dform requires power9-vector
>
>> In both cases, the preferred behavior is that the target option
>> -mno-power9-vector causes power9-dform to be automatically disabled.
>> This patch implements the preferred behavior and adds a test case to
>> demonstrate the fix.
>
> Or it could do -mpower9-dform-scalar but disable -mpower9-dform-vector?
> That seems more reasonable.
The internal problem report sent to me said "-mno-power9-vector should
override power9-dform unless the latter has been deliberately specified
by the user." I'm just following orders. If you think it preferable to
only override -mpower-dform-vector, I'll make that modification.
>
> Ideally none of the -mpower9-dform* or -mpower9-vector options would
> exist at all, of course.
>
>> 2017-03-21 Kelvin Nilsen <kelvin@gcc.gnu.org>
>>
>> * config/rs6000/rs6000.c (rs6000_option_override_internal): Change
>> handling of certain combinations of target options, including the
>> combinations -mpower8-vector vs. -mno-vsx, -mpower8-vector vs.
>> -mno-power8-vector, and -mpower9_dform vs. -mno-power9-vector.
>
> Those other changes are independent?
Actually, these other changes are not independent. My initial attempt
at a patch only changed the behavior of -mpower9_dform vs.
-mno-power9-vector. But this actually resulted in a regression of an
existing test. To "properly" handle the new case without impacting
existing "established" behavior (as represented in the existing dejagnu
testsuite), I had to make these other changes as well.
>
>
> Segher
>
>
--
Kelvin Nilsen, Ph.D. kdnilsen@linux.vnet.ibm.com
home office: 801-756-4821, cell: 520-991-6727
IBM Linux Technology Center - PPC Toolchain
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-03-22 23:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-03-22 17:44 Kelvin Nilsen
2017-03-22 23:35 ` Segher Boessenkool
2017-03-22 23:56 ` Kelvin Nilsen [this message]
2017-03-23 4:17 ` Segher Boessenkool
2017-06-28 14:30 ` Backport " Kelvin Nilsen
2017-06-28 21:03 ` Segher Boessenkool
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=637d9e0f-a8b0-88d0-91d9-e8aba5e2d7f3@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=kdnilsen@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=segher@kernel.crashing.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: 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).