This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH 1/2] s/390: Implement "target" attribute.
- From: Andreas Krebbel <krebbel at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com>
- To: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, Ulrich Weigand <Ulrich dot Weigand at de dot ibm dot com>
- Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2015 14:09:31 +0100
- Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] s/390: Implement "target" attribute.
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20150925135941 dot GA14892 at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com> <20150925140123 dot GB14892 at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com> <20151016123031 dot GA7320 at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com> <20151026101022 dot GA3159 at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com> <56337A23 dot 2070607 at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com> <20151102084413 dot GA4147 at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com>
On 11/02/2015 09:44 AM, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> (@Uli: I'd like to hear your opinion on this issue.
> Original message:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-10/msg03403.html).
>
> On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 03:09:39PM +0100, Andreas Krebbel wrote:
>> Why do we need x_s390_arch_specified and x_s390_tune_specified? You
>> should be able to use opts_set->x_s390_arch and opts_set->x_s390_tune
>> instead? (patch attached, your tests keep working with that change).
>
> The idea was that -mtune on the command line is *not* overridden
> by the "arch" target attribute. This would allow to change the
> architecture for a specific function and keep the -mtune= option
> from the command line. But as a matter of fact, the current patch
> doesn't do it either (bug?).
Your testcases even seem to check for this behavior so it looked intentional to me. But I agree
that being able to keep the -mtune cmdline value for a function while only changing the used
instruction set would be good.
Could you please elaborate why implementing this requires the new flags?
-Andreas-