This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH][x86] march aliases
- From: Uros Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com>
- To: "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>
- Cc: Ilya Tocar <tocarip dot intel at gmail dot com>, GCC Patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>, Kirill Yukhin <kirill dot yukhin at gmail dot com>
- Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2013 12:19:56 +0100
- Subject: Re: [PATCH][x86] march aliases
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20131219131107 dot GA82499 at msticlxl7 dot ims dot intel dot com> <20131219131835 dot GU892 at tucnak dot redhat dot com> <CAMe9rOpWoqLE3uJPk5_ywUg18BWyEHiLUvw8-vQ66cYunmMoDw at mail dot gmail dot com> <20131219153514 dot GB82499 at msticlxl7 dot ims dot intel dot com> <CAFULd4Zr_cjNiXxfYtEE6YP4R8VzgWLS3XS1UN9DQQrVTGG8YA at mail dot gmail dot com> <20131219164556 dot GX892 at tucnak dot redhat dot com> <CAFULd4ZcmYU7nx54=xfWZ-TpFh9OJ2r0Qp9UhMfaSEOHSiyzww at mail dot gmail dot com> <20131220164740 dot GA46311 at msticlxl7 dot ims dot intel dot com> <CAMe9rOr78_-ww48+d6kRtc0rprmM9maROEwt1GtysJ7vNxzkqg at mail dot gmail dot com>
On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 5:55 PM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 8:47 AM, Ilya Tocar <tocarip.intel@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > Perhaps we should add sandybridge, ivybridge and haswell aliases for
>>> > corei7-avx, core-avx-i, core-avx2? I mean, it is a nightmare to remember
>>> > which one has the i7 in and which doesn't even for me.
>>>
>>> Yes please, I think this is a good idea.
>>
>> I've added aliases for haswell, sandybridge, ivybridge, bonnell,
>> nehalem and silvermont.
>>
> Old names, like corei7, core-avx-i, atom, .. don't have precise
> description for the processor. I think gcc driver should keep
> accepting them. But they should be marked as undocumented
> or deprecated. They should be removed from documentation.
How about we leave these as -march=... to refer to the architecture,
and reintroduce -mcpu= to refer to the exact cpu? Internally, the
-mcpu would use some architecture specific base PTA_ attributes (as
Jakub suggested) and would add some fine-tuning PTA_ attributes, based
on -mcpu selection. This way, -march stays as is, and can still be
used for some generally distributed binaries.
Uros.