From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mailbox.box.xen0n.name (mail.xen0n.name [115.28.160.31]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 00D893857342 for ; Wed, 27 Jul 2022 07:21:30 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 00D893857342 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=xen0n.name Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=xen0n.name DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=xen0n.name; s=mail; t=1658906487; bh=7MU91LO9mM6WOBOY0ptWkWQ0E+PKS5BzE6fCbia+FPc=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=KSNPpGNyl2gJWMv6ejEhFGG7PKtguIqegt5Xm5aWqlMqeynXcDYMAdhVbHH5JjK1d WWN2nL2sucWbdkM5rhKzytZQH157IISA/RAYp+PQOFl6lU58P14nCAaeZQcAjBIlY/ mfxg+r/wh17837C+F/7Kewu3uuvoLOt4eY0GBGPM= Received: from [100.100.57.219] (unknown [220.248.53.61]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mailbox.box.xen0n.name (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D6D7760610; Wed, 27 Jul 2022 15:21:26 +0800 (CST) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2022 15:21:26 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:105.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/105.0a1 Subject: Re: [PATCH] LoongArch: document -m[no-]explicit-relocs Content-Language: en-US To: Xi Ruoyao , Lulu Cheng , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Cc: xuchenghua@loongson.cn References: <767f8ddc835151d62ce825b8fe7b2ff7b4e3d2e6.camel@xry111.site> From: WANG Xuerui In-Reply-To: <767f8ddc835151d62ce825b8fe7b2ff7b4e3d2e6.camel@xry111.site> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-11.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, GIT_PATCH_0, NICE_REPLY_A, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gcc-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2022 07:21:34 -0000 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