This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [patch] new portlet: cirrus-maverick
- From: Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at redhat dot com>
- To: Phil Edwards <phil at jaj dot com>
- Cc: rearnsha at arm dot com, nickc at redhat dot com, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, rsandifo at redhat dot com
- Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2002 10:01:54 -0700
- Subject: Re: [patch] new portlet: cirrus-maverick
- References: <20020814085752.A11136@redhat.com> <20020814124307.A14870@disaster.basement.lan>
On Wed, Aug 14, 2002 at 12:43:07PM -0400, Phil Edwards wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 14, 2002 at 08:57:52AM -0700, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
> > -mnop-fun-dllimport @gol
> > + -mmaverick-fix-invalid-insns -mno-maverick-fix-invalid-insns @gol
> > -mtpcs-frame -mtpcs-leaf-frame @gol
> > *************** Allows calls via function pointers (incl
> > of executing a function pointer if this option is enabled.
> > +
> > + @item -mmaverick-fix-invalid-insns
> > + @opindex mmaverick-fix-invalid-insns
> > + Insert nops to fix invalid Maverick instruction combinations.
> > +
> > + @item -mno-maverick-fix-invalid-insns
> > + @opindex mno-maverick-fix-invalid-insns
> > + Do not insert nops to fix invalid Maverick instruction combinations.
>
> I thought the convention was to only document the option that was /not/
> the default? Or at least to describe which of the flags was on by default.
News to me. I can do either one. Which is preferred?
Btw, the default is no-maverick-fix-invalid-insns.
Aldy