This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Fwd: [PATCH]: Clean up driver processing for IMA


(I hit "reply" instead of "reply-all"; sorry).

Begin forwarded message:

From: Caroline Tice <ctice@apple.com>
Date: March 22, 2004 4:10:03 PM PST
To: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH]: Clean up driver processing for IMA


On Mar 22, 2004, at 3:57 PM, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:

On Mon, Mar 22, 2004 at 03:48:44PM -0800, Caroline Tice wrote:
This patch cleans up the way the gcc driver passes multiple input files
to the compiler. In particular, it
adds a new flag "combine". When this flag is passed to the compiler
driver, the driver attempts to pass
(for example) all the *.c files to the cc1 compiler together, allowing
for IMA . This patch also fixes the
driver so that "-save-temps" works properly with "-combine", and so
that "-combine" can also handle
linker files and source files for multiple languages (for example if
you pass it a combination of c and
c++ files, it will attempt to pass all the c files to cc1 at once, but
will pass the c++ files individually to
cc1plus, then pass the appropriate options to the assembler/linker). I
have currently not modified the c++ or objective-c compiler specs to
cope with multiple source files at once.

I have tested this on an Apple G4 running apple-darwin, and an i386
running Linux. It has bootstrapped
and I am in the middle of running the DejaGnu tests. (I also tested
various combinations of the
"-combine" "-save-temps" "-S" and "-c" flags on a multiple file C
program).

Assuming it passes all the tests is this ok to commit to gcc 3.5?

I didn't review the patch, but I can still tell you that a patch whose
purpose is to change option handling is not OK without matching
documentation updates.

Does this change gcc -o foo foo.c bar.c back to not using IMA?


As far as I can tell, the line above *NEVER* used IMA. IMA was ONLY turned on if you added the "-c" flag as
well as the "-o" flag. I had assumed that the reason for this was that people did not want IMA turned on most
of the time. (And it also never worked with the -save-temps flag). So it seemed reasonable to make this
assumption explicit and add a flag that actually gives direct control for turning on/off IMA. If people would rather
just have it on all the time by default, that would be easy enough to correct.

You are right, I forgot to add documentation for the "combine" option, but I will be happy to do so.

-- Caroline Tice
cticed@apple.com


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]