From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-patches-return-326098-listarch-gcc-patches=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 24796 invoked by alias); 6 Sep 2012 23:03:15 -0000
Received: (qmail 24752 invoked by uid 22791); 6 Sep 2012 23:03:13 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.4 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_WL,TW_MV
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from relay1.mentorg.com (HELO relay1.mentorg.com) (192.94.38.131)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 06 Sep 2012 23:02:59 +0000
Received: from svr-orw-exc-10.mgc.mentorg.com ([147.34.98.58])	by relay1.mentorg.com with esmtp 	id 1T9l6A-0003Sx-Cn from Maciej_Rozycki@mentor.com ; Thu, 06 Sep 2012 16:02:58 -0700
Received: from SVR-IES-FEM-01.mgc.mentorg.com ([137.202.0.104]) by SVR-ORW-EXC-10.mgc.mentorg.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675);	 Thu, 6 Sep 2012 16:02:58 -0700
Received: from [172.30.3.208] (137.202.0.76) by SVR-IES-FEM-01.mgc.mentorg.com (137.202.0.104) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.1.289.1; Fri, 7 Sep 2012 00:02:56 +0100
Date: Thu, 06 Sep 2012 23:03:00 -0000
From: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@codesourcery.com>
To: Andrew Pinski <pinskia@gmail.com>
CC: James Lemke <jwlemke@codesourcery.com>, <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>,	Catherine Moore <clm@codesourcery.com>, Nathan Sidwell	<nathan@codesourcery.com>, Nathan Froyd <froydnj@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PowerPC VLE port
In-Reply-To: <CA+=Sn1=vvEnspw9csetpGujxm8hQUJt_E2Y1n8u3Bx_dSGfQiQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.1.10.1209062356460.28358@tp.orcam.me.uk>
References: <50491BE2.2020509@codesourcery.com> <CA+=Sn1kxrprgeVhdzt-Fc+pxJ=+GcEVN--o8+b8yd5pioK3z-g@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.1.10.1209062328580.28358@tp.orcam.me.uk> <CA+=Sn1=vvEnspw9csetpGujxm8hQUJt_E2Y1n8u3Bx_dSGfQiQ@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 1.10 (DEB 962 2008-03-14)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-patches.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org
X-SW-Source: 2012-09/txt/msg00433.txt.bz2

On Thu, 6 Sep 2012, Andrew Pinski wrote:

> >  You mean this:
> >
> > +  POWERPC_E200_MASK = MASK_VLE | MASK_ISEL | MASK_MULTIPLE
> >
> > ?  Well, this just marks that the e200 processor supports ISEL regardless
> > of the mode selected (standard vs VLE).  Then with -mvle ISEL is supposed
> > to be enabled regardless of the processor setting in effect (ISEL is a
> > part of the base VLE instruction set, while it is optional in the standard
> > mode).
> 
> What I mean is set TARGET_ISEL to true when -mvle is supplied.

1. Will it work (switch back to -mno-isel) if -mno-vle is requested 
   further on the command line?

2. Separating the settings will help when/if per-function VLE/non-VLE 
   switching support is implemented, e.g. along the lines of 
   attribute((mips16)) and attribute((nomips16)).

  Maciej