Re: [PATCH] LoongArch: document -m[no-]explicit-relocs

[WANG Xuerui <i@xen0n.name>]

Hi,

On 2022/7/27 15:06, Xi Ruoyao wrote:
> Document newly introduced -m[no-]explicit-relocs options.  Ok for trunk?
>
> -- >8 --
>
> gcc/ChangeLog:
>
> 	* doc/invoke.texi: Document -m[no-]explicit-relocs for
> 	LoongArch.
> ---
>   gcc/doc/invoke.texi | 12 ++++++++++++
>   1 file changed, 12 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/gcc/doc/invoke.texi b/gcc/doc/invoke.texi
> index 9a3f2d14c5a..04418f80428 100644
> --- a/gcc/doc/invoke.texi
> +++ b/gcc/doc/invoke.texi
> @@ -24939,6 +24939,18 @@ global symbol: The data got table must be within +/-8EiB addressing space.
>   @end itemize
>   @end table
>   The default code model is @code{normal}.
> +
> +@item -mexplicit-relocs
> +@itemx -mno-explicit-relocs
> +@opindex mexplicit-relocs
> +@opindex mno-explicit-relocs
> +Generate (do not generate) explicit symbol relocations instead of
> +assembler macros.  Using explicit relocations can improve code generation.
> +GCC detects the capaiblities of the assembler when it is built and sets
> +the default to @code{-mexplicit-relocs} if the assembler supports the
> +syntax for explicit specification of relocations, and
> +@code{-mno-explicit-relocs} otherwise.  This option is mostly useful for
> +debugging or using an assembler different from build-time.

Some text massaging, along with some shameful copying from other (read: 
RISC-V) -mexplicit-relocs docs...

"Use or do not use assembler relocation operators when dealing with 
symbolic addresses. The alternative is to use assembler macros instead, 
which may limit optimization.

The default value for the option is determined during GCC build-time by 
detecting corresponding assembler support: @code{-mexplicit-relocs} if 
said support is present, @code{-mno-explicit-relocs} otherwise. This 
option is mostly useful for debugging, or interoperation with assemblers 
different from the build-time one."

What do you think?

>   @end table
>   
>   @node M32C Options