I have bootstrapped and tested this patch on powerpc64le-unkonwn-linux-gnu with no regressions. Is this ok for backporting to gcc 6?
On 03/22/2017 10:17 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 05:55:53PM -0600, Kelvin Nilsen wrote: >>> Or it could do -mpower9-dform-scalar but disable -mpower9-dform-vector? >>> That seems more reasonable. >> >> The internal problem report sent to me said "-mno-power9-vector should >> override power9-dform unless the latter has been deliberately specified >> by the user." I'm just following orders. > > Heh :-) > >> If you think it preferable to >> only override -mpower-dform-vector, I'll make that modification. > > It is more logical. Or so I though. But as it turns out, > -mpower9-dform-scalar is about vector registers as well. > > So the patch is approved for trunk as-is. Thanks! > >>>> * config/rs6000/rs6000.c (rs6000_option_override_internal): Change >>>> handling of certain combinations of target options, including the >>>> combinations -mpower8-vector vs. -mno-vsx, -mpower8-vector vs. >>>> -mno-power8-vector, and -mpower9_dform vs. -mno-power9-vector. >>> >>> Those other changes are independent? >> >> Actually, these other changes are not independent. My initial attempt >> at a patch only changed the behavior of -mpower9_dform vs. >> -mno-power9-vector. But this actually resulted in a regression of an >> existing test. To "properly" handle the new case without impacting >> existing "established" behavior (as represented in the existing dejagnu >> testsuite), I had to make these other changes as well. > > Too many options :-( > > > Segher > > -- Kelvin Nilsen, Ph.D. kdnil...@linux.vnet.ibm.com home office: 801-756-4821, cell: 520-991-6727 IBM Linux Technology Center - PPC Toolchain
