From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp001-out.apm-internet.net (smtp001-out.apm-internet.net [85.119.248.222]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E8B133850208 for ; Thu, 13 Oct 2022 10:09:34 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org E8B133850208 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=sandoe.co.uk Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=sandoe.co.uk Received: (qmail 21135 invoked from network); 13 Oct 2022 10:09:32 -0000 X-APM-Out-ID: 16656557722113 X-APM-Authkey: 257869/1(257869/1) 10 Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.1.95?) (81.138.1.83) by smtp001.apm-internet.net with SMTP; 13 Oct 2022 10:09:32 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.7\)) Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] rs6000: Rework option -mpowerpc64 handling [PR106680] From: Iain Sandoe In-Reply-To: <4652D74F-D0EF-4DFD-A87C-D2CA1996E468@sandoe.co.uk> Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2022 11:09:31 +0100 Cc: Peter Bergner , GCC Patches , David Edelsohn , Segher Boessenkool Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <63afd344-38fa-7a8e-4958-8256c2a9bca7@linux.ibm.com> <4652D74F-D0EF-4DFD-A87C-D2CA1996E468@sandoe.co.uk> To: "Kewen.Lin" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.7) X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,KAM_COUK,KAM_DMARC_STATUS,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE,TXREP autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: > On 12 Oct 2022, at 09:57, Iain Sandoe wrote: >> On 12 Oct 2022, at 09:12, Kewen.Lin wrote: >=20 >> PR106680 shows that -m32 -mpowerpc64 is different from >> -mpowerpc64 -m32, this is determined by the way how we >> handle option powerpc64 in rs6000_handle_option. >>=20 >> Segher pointed out this difference should be taken as >> a bug and we should ensure that option powerpc64 is >> independent of -m32/-m64. So this patch removes the >> handlings in rs6000_handle_option and add some necessary >> supports in rs6000_option_override_internal instead. >>=20 >> With this patch, if users specify -m{no-,}powerpc64, the >> specified value is honoured, otherwise, for 64bit it >> always enables OPTION_MASK_POWERPC64; while for 32bit >> and TARGET_POWERPC64 and OS_MISSING_POWERPC64, it disables >> OPTION_MASK_POWERPC64. >>=20 >> btw, following Segher's suggestion, I did some tries to warn >> when OPTION_MASK_POWERPC64 is set for OS_MISSING_POWERPC64. >> If warn for the case that powerpc64 is specified explicitly, >> there are some TCs using -m32 -mpowerpc64 on ppc64-linux, >> they need some updates, meanwhile the artificial run >> with "--target_board=3Dunix'{-m32/-mpowerpc64}'" will have >> noisy warnings on ppc64-linux. If warn for the case that >> it's specified implicitly, they can just be initialized by >> TARGET_DEFAULT (like -m32 on ppc64-linux) or set from the=20 >> given cpu mask, we have to special case them and not to warn. >> As Segher's latest comment, I decide not to warn them and >> keep it consistent with before. >>=20 >> Bootstrapped and regress-tested on: >> - powerpc64-linux-gnu P7 and P8 {-m64,-m32} >> - powerpc64le-linux-gnu P9 and P10 >> - powerpc-ibm-aix7.2.0.0 {-maix64,-maix32} >>=20 >> Hi Iain, could you help to test this new patch on darwin >> again? Thanks in advance! >=20 > I kicked off a bootstrap - and 'check-gcc-c' .. if all goes well, = there will be an=20 > answer in =E2=89=88 7hours. If something fails, the answer will be = sooner ;) bootstrapped and tested on powerpc-darwin9, with default CPU = configuration. I have not yet tried tuning or cpu configure options. testresults compare =E2=80=9Cnominal" against a recent set (another day = elapsed time would be needed for a proper regtest). thanks Iain