This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH] Don't build 32-bit libatomic with -march=i486 on x86-64
- From: Uros Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com>
- To: "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>
- Cc: "gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 20:18:37 +0200
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Don't build 32-bit libatomic with -march=i486 on x86-64
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20160419150735 dot GA7668 at intel dot com> <CAFULd4ZV0jkjmgyH5HY_-BExB10YDtkXh4uL4_ObkVABU74PbA at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAMe9rOqZ1=kjTRqoxBJQkeowgo9U1Nqjs212=_1YVNQuWewRWg at mail dot gmail dot com>
On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 8:08 PM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 8:45 AM, Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 5:07 PM, H.J. Lu <hongjiu.lu@intel.com> wrote:
>>> Gcc uses the same -march= for both -m32 and -m64 on x86-64 unless
>>> --with-arch-32= is used. There is no need for -march=i486 to compile
>>> 32-bit libatomic on x86-64.
>>>
>>> Tested on x86-64. OK for trunk?
>>>
>>> H.J.
>>> ---
>>> PR target/70454
>>> * configure.tgt (XCFLAGS): Don't add -march=i486 to compile
>>> 32-bit x86 target library on x86-64.
>>> ---
>>> libatomic/configure.tgt | 10 ++--------
>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/libatomic/configure.tgt b/libatomic/configure.tgt
>>> index c5470d7..bbb93fc 100644
>>> --- a/libatomic/configure.tgt
>>> +++ b/libatomic/configure.tgt
>>> @@ -81,14 +81,8 @@ case "${target_cpu}" in
>>> try_ifunc=yes
>>> ;;
>>> x86_64)
>>> - case " ${CC} ${CFLAGS} " in
>>> - *" -m32 "*)
>>> - XCFLAGS="${XCFLAGS} -march=i486 -mtune=generic"
>>> - XCFLAGS="${XCFLAGS} -fomit-frame-pointer"
>>> - ;;
>>> - *)
>>> - ;;
>>> - esac
>>> + # Since 64-bit arch > i486, we can use the same -march= to build
>>> + # both 32-bit and 64-bit target libraries.
>>> ARCH=x86
>>> # ??? Detect when -mcx16 is already enabled.
>>> try_ifunc=yes
>>> --
>>> 2.5.5
>>>
>>
>> No, this is wrong. My build with default options defaults to i386. So,
>> the difference between
>>
>
> How was your GCC configured? Did you use
>
> --with-arch_32=i386
Nope, just:
~/gcc-svn/trunk/configure
Uros.