public inbox for gcc@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
To: Paolo Carlini <paolo.carlini@oracle.com>
Cc: "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>,
	"gcc@gcc.gnu.org" <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>,
	        Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: Why is __i686 undefined for x86_64 -m32 (in mainline)
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 21:03:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100316205821.GB3601@sunsite.ms.mff.cuni.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4B9FEFCA.2060308@oracle.com>

On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 09:53:30PM +0100, Paolo Carlini wrote:
> On 03/16/2010 09:40 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> > We never defined __i686 for -m32 by default on x86_64. Here is
> > a patch to define __i686 for -m32 if the processor supports it.
> >   
> If I understand correctly the logic underlying the recent work in this
> area, I think we certainly want your patch, because otherwise we have
> kind of an inconsistent situation: the i686 facilites *are* available,
> but __i686 is undefined.
> 
> Maybe the patch should go to gcc-patches to...

I don't think it is a good idea to change the meaning of the macros years
after they have been introduced.
You could add a different macro if you want.
Why should be __i686 special?  i686 does have __i586 features too, should it
define also __i586, __i486?  Should __core2 define __pentium4?  Etc., etc.

	Jakub

  reply	other threads:[~2010-03-16 20:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <4B9FDCC1.2080201@oracle.com>
2010-03-16 20:00 ` H.J. Lu
2010-03-16 20:40   ` Paolo Carlini
2010-03-16 20:53     ` H.J. Lu
2010-03-16 20:58       ` Paolo Carlini
2010-03-16 21:03         ` Jakub Jelinek [this message]
2010-03-16 21:06           ` Paolo Carlini
2010-03-16 21:06             ` H.J. Lu
2010-03-16 21:08               ` H.J. Lu
2010-03-16 21:15           ` H.J. Lu
2010-03-16 21:21             ` Paolo Carlini
2010-03-16 21:31               ` H.J. Lu
2010-03-16 21:34                 ` Paolo Carlini
2010-03-16 21:36                   ` H.J. Lu
2010-03-16 22:27                     ` Paolo Carlini
2010-03-16 22:32                       ` H.J. Lu
2010-03-16 22:36                         ` Paolo Carlini
2010-03-16 22:39                           ` H.J. Lu
2010-03-16 22:57                             ` Paolo Carlini
2010-03-16 23:11                               ` H.J. Lu
2010-03-17  3:27                                 ` Paolo Carlini
2010-03-16 19:53 Paolo Carlini

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20100316205821.GB3601@sunsite.ms.mff.cuni.cz \
    --to=jakub@redhat.com \
    --cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=hjl.tools@gmail.com \
    --cc=jason@redhat.com \
    --cc=paolo.carlini@oracle.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).