This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: GCC target_clone support
- From: Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>
- To: Michael Meissner <meissner at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com>, GCC mailing list <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Segher Boessenkool <segher at kernel dot crashing dot org>, David Edelsohn <dje dot gcc at gmail dot com>, Jan Hubicka <hubicka at ucw dot cz>, Uros Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com>, Kirill Yukhin <kirill dot yukhin at gmail dot com>, Richard Biener <rguenther at suse dot de>, Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>, Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>, Richard Earnshaw <richard dot earnshaw at arm dot com>, Marcus Shawcroft <marcus dot shawcroft at arm dot com>, Nick Clifton <nickc at redhat dot com>, Ramana Radhakrishnan <ramana dot radhakrishnan at arm dot com>, Bernd Schmidt <bschmidt at redhat dot com>, Hartmut Penner <hepenner at us dot ibm dot com>, Ulrich Weigand <uweigand at de dot ibm dot com>, Andreas Krebbel <Andreas dot Krebbel at de dot ibm dot com>, Evgeny Stupachenko <evstupac at gmail dot com>
- Date: Fri, 5 May 2017 14:17:40 -0600
- Subject: Re: GCC target_clone support
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- Authentication-results: ext-mx03.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com
- Authentication-results: ext-mx03.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=law at redhat dot com
- Dkim-filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mx1.redhat.com B5D22804FE
- Dmarc-filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mx1.redhat.com B5D22804FE
- References: <20170505181859.GA11428@ibm-tiger.the-meissners.org>
On 05/05/2017 12:18 PM, Michael Meissner wrote:
Sounds wise to me -- as you know its not unusual to find commonality
when a feature is enabled on a new target.
I'm in the middle of adding support for the target_clone attribute to the
PowerPC. At the moment, the x86_64/i386 port is the only port that supports
target_clone. I added the arm/s390 port maintainers to this query, because
those ports might also consider supporting target_clones in the future.
In doing the work, I noticed that some of the functions called by the target
hooks that were fairly generic, and we might want to move these functions into
common code? Would people object if I put out a patch to move these functions
to common code?
I also have a question on the functionality of target_clone that I will address
in a separate message.
So far, the list of generic code that could be moved to common code to allow
other ports to add target_clone support include:Please consider this class of changes pre-approved. There's no reason
to wait for review as you move this stuff around and generalize it slightly.