*PING* [PATCH v3 10/10] fortran: Add -finline-intrinsics flag for MINLOC/MAXLOC [PR90608]

[Mikael Morin]

Le 14/09/2024 à 20:02, Steve Kargl a écrit :
> On Fri, Sep 13, 2024 at 12:27:07PM +0200, Mikael Morin wrote:
>>>
>>> gcc/fortran/ChangeLog:
>>>
>>> 	* invoke.texi(finline-intrinsics): Document new flag.
>>> 	* lang.opt (finline-intrinsics, finline-intrinsics=,
>>> 	fno-inline-intrinsics): New flags.
>>> 	* options.cc (gfc_post_options): If the option variable controling
> 
> s/controling/controlling
> 
>>>    The default value for @var{n} is 30.
>>> +@opindex @code{finline-intrinsics}
>>> +@item -finline-intrinsics
>>> +@itemx -finline-intrinsics=@var{intr1},@var{intr2},...
>>> +Prefer generating inline code over calls to libgfortran functions to implement
>>> +intrinscs.
> 
> s/intrinscs/intrinsics
> 
>>> +Usage of intrinsics can be implemented either by generating a call to the
>>> +libgfortran library function implementing it, or by directly generating the
>>> +implementation code inline.  For most intrinsics, only a single of those
>>> +variants is available and there is no choice of implementation.  For some of
>>> +them, however, both are available, and for them the @code{-finline-intrinsics}
>>> +flag permits the selection of inline code generation in its positive form, or
>>> +library call generation in its negative form @code{-fno-inline-intrinsics}.
>>> +With @code{-finline-intrinsics=...} or @code{-fno-inline-intrinsics=...}, the
>>> +choice applies only to the intrinsics present in the comma-separated list
>>> +provided as argument.
> 
> While I understand the intent of 'positive form' vs 'negative form', the
> above might be clearer as
> 
>     Usage of intrinsics can be implemented either by generating a call
>     to the libgfortran library function or by directly generating inline
>     code.  For most intrinsics, only a single variant is available, and
>     there is no choice of implementation.  However, some intrinsics can
>     use a library function or inline code, wher inline code typically offers
>     opportunities for additional optimization over a library function.
>     With @code{-finline-intrinsics=...} or @code{-fno-inline-intrinsics=...}, the
>     choice applies only to the intrinsics present in the comma-separated list
>     provided as argument.
> 
>>> +For each intrinsic, if no choice of implementation was made through either of
>>> +the flag variants, a default behaviour is chosen depending on optimization:
>>> +library calls are generated when not optimizing or when optimizing for size;
>>> +otherwise inline code is preferred.
>>> +
> 
> 
> OK with consideration the above comments.
> 

Harald actually gave a partial green light on this already, but 
obviously there was still room for improvement.
Thanks for the review, I'm incorporating the changes you suggested.

I was (and still am) waiting for a review from someone knowledgeable in 
the options system.  I'm considering proceeding without, as I prefer 
seeing this pushed sooner than later.