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]

Re: Deprecating Itanium1 for GCC 4.4

From: Steven Bosscher <stevenb dot gcc at gmail dot com>
To: NightStrike <nightstrike at gmail dot com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi at firstfloor dot org>, GCC Patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, gcc mailing list <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Jim Wilson <wilson at tuliptree dot org>, sje at cup dot hp dot com, "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>, Gerald Pfeifer <gerald at pfeifer dot com>
Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2009 15:56:15 +0100
Subject: Re: Deprecating Itanium1 for GCC 4.4
References: <571f6b510903150916qa6ec3a4o6a85c09698ee0bb@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.LSU.1.99.0903151823370.20299@acrux.dbai.tuwien.ac.at> <571f6b510903191624l4e5fa9b4q87cdc1fd14b87ff8@mail.gmail.com> <87hc1o1qxw.fsf@basil.nowhere.org> <571f6b510903200410x53a872cep1c89e38e2baf502@mail.gmail.com> <b609cb3b0903200752x5f5e63f1p7167bfeca28e666c@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 3:52 PM, NightStrike <nightstrike@gmail.com> wrote:
> So because Itanium1 has fallen into disuse, you are dropping support
> for Itanium2? ?Or have I misread this?

You are *so* wrong it's hardly worht answering, but anyway...

Of course *NOT* remove Itanium2, duh!

But yes, remove Itanum1 scheduler descriptions and all code to not
emit Itanium2 instructions when tuning for Itanium1. Basically, all
code that is conditional on "ia64_tune == PROCESSOR_ITANIUM".

Gr.
Steven

References:
- Re: Deprecating Itanium1 for GCC 4.4
  - From: Steven Bosscher
- Re: Deprecating Itanium1 for GCC 4.4
  - From: Andi Kleen
- Re: Deprecating Itanium1 for GCC 4.4
  - From: Steven Bosscher
- Re: Deprecating Itanium1 for GCC 4.4
  - From: NightStrike

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