From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19813 invoked by alias); 3 Apr 2003 02:36:00 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-prs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 19793 invoked by uid 71); 3 Apr 2003 02:36:00 -0000 Resent-Date: 3 Apr 2003 02:36:00 -0000 Resent-Message-ID: <20030403023600.19792.qmail@sources.redhat.com> Resent-From: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org (GNATS Filer) Resent-Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Resent-Reply-To: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org, garen@garen.net Received: (qmail 18275 invoked by uid 48); 3 Apr 2003 02:28:59 -0000 Message-Id: <20030403022859.18274.qmail@sources.redhat.com> Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2003 02:36:00 -0000 From: garen@garen.net Reply-To: garen@garen.net To: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org X-Send-Pr-Version: gnatsweb-2.9.3 (1.1.1.1.2.31) Subject: other/10301: Side effects of architecture specific flags are not documented. X-SW-Source: 2003-04/txt/msg00083.txt.bz2 List-Id: >Number: 10301 >Category: other >Synopsis: Side effects of architecture specific flags are not documented. >Confidential: no >Severity: serious >Priority: medium >Responsible: unassigned >State: open >Class: doc-bug >Submitter-Id: net >Arrival-Date: Thu Apr 03 02:36:00 UTC 2003 >Closed-Date: >Last-Modified: >Originator: garen@garen.net >Release: All >Organization: >Environment: >Description: Looking in the gcc archives, I noticed a post that sums up the problem fairly well: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2002-12/msg00235.html There is a lot of confusion about what is implied by the -march settings. Over in Gentoo land, there are several long running forum threads with hundreds of posts of people asking about what flags they ought to use: http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic.php?t=43648 Also, wrong code-gen bugs related to SSE2 insns are so widespread I kind of wonder why they aren't disabled, documentad as an experimental feature, or generate some kind of warning when used. It would be very helpful if these sort of things were documented. I'd think they'd go in the "Intel 386 and AMD x86-64 Options" section of the manual (http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-3.2.2/gcc/i386-and-x86-64-Options.html#i386%20and%20x86-64%20Options) >How-To-Repeat: >Fix: >Release-Note: >Audit-Trail: >Unformatted: