Re: [PATCH] rs6000: Replace OPTION_MASK_DIRECT_MOVE with OPTION_MASK_P8_VECTOR [PR101865]

["Kewen.Lin" <linkw@linux.ibm.com>]

Hi Peter,

on 2024/4/8 21:21, Peter Bergner wrote:
> On 4/8/24 3:55 AM, Kewen.Lin wrote:
>> on 2024/4/6 06:28, Peter Bergner wrote:
>>> +mno-direct-move
>>> +Target Undocumented WarnRemoved
>>> +
>>>  mdirect-move
>>> -Target Undocumented Mask(DIRECT_MOVE) Var(rs6000_isa_flags) WarnRemoved
>>> +Target Undocumented WarnRemoved
>>
>> When reviewing my previous patch to "neuter option -mpower{8,9}-vector",
>> Segher mentioned that we don't need to keep such option warning all the
>> time and can drop it like in a release later as users should be aware of
>> this information then, I agreed and considering that patch disabling
>> -m[no-]direct-move was r8-7845-g57f108f5a1e1b2, I think we can just remove
>> m[no-]direct-move here?  What do you think?
> 
> 
> I'm fine with that if that is what we want.  So something like the following?
> 
> +;; This option existed in the past, but now is always silently ignored.
> mdirect-move
> -Target Undocumented Mask(DIRECT_MOVE) Var(rs6000_isa_flags) WarnRemoved
> +Target Undocumented Ignore

I prefer to remove it completely, that is:

> -mdirect-move
> -Target Undocumented Mask(DIRECT_MOVE) Var(rs6000_isa_flags) WarnRemoved

The reason why you still kept it is to keep a historical record here?

Segher pointed out to me that this kind of option complete removal should be
stage 1 stuff, so let's defer to make it in a separated patch next release
(including some other options like mfpgpr you showed below etc.). :)

For the original patch,

> +mno-direct-move
> +Target Undocumented WarnRemoved

s/WarnRemoved/Ignore/ to match some other existing practice, there is no
warning now if specifying -mno-direct-move and it would be good to keep
the same behavior for users.

OK for trunk and active branches with this tweaked, thanks!

> 
> 
> The above seems to silently ignore both -mdirect-move and -mno-direct-move
> which I think is what we want.  That said, it's not what we've done with
> other options, but maybe those just need to be changed too?

Yes, I think they need to be changed too (next release).

BR,
Kewen