https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=123245
Bug ID: 123245
Summary: Inconsistent location for target-specific --param
documentation
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: documentation
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: sandra at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
While looking into PR112650 I observed that we aren't consistent about where
target-specific --param keywords are documented. For aarch64, x86, and gcn,
they're listed with the rest of the --param keywords in the optimize options
section, after the main table but without a subsection or anchor that can be
used for cross-references; for loongarch and rs6000 they're listed with the
target-specific options. Clearly they should all be with the rest of the
--param options, or all with the target-specific options; which is preferred?
I also observe that the analyzer parameters are documented in the main --param
table (mixed up with other parameters) even though these are not optimization
options at all. If we want to keep all the parameters documented in the same
section, I think it would make sense to take it out of the optimization options
and put it in a @node by itself with separate subsections for optimization,
analyzer, and target-specific parameters with appropriate cross-references from
the existing sections for those kinds of options.
Anybody have strong feelings about how to proceed?
