Hi all,

The mtune= documentation in doc/invoke.texi contains some obsolete CPU names
that have been removed from the Arm and AArch64 backends. This patch removes
them.

All removed CPU names:
        * arm2
        * arm250
        * arm3
        * arm60
        * arm600
        * arm610
        * arm620
        * arm7
        * arm7m
        * arm7d
        * arm7dm
        * arm7di
        * arm7dmi
        * arm70
        * arm700
        * arm700i
        * arm710
        * arm710c
        * arm720
        * arm7500
        * arm7500fe

This patch has no functional impact but has still been bootstrapped and
regression tested on aarch64-none-elf.

OK for trunk?

gcc/ChangeLog:

2018-11-23  Sam Tebbs<sam.te...@arm.com>

        * doc/invoke.texi (-mtune=): Remove obsolete CPU names.

diff --git a/gcc/doc/invoke.texi b/gcc/doc/invoke.texi
index 
d46ebd02c4e0fee7b1c93a9e96d80113f6af93a7..0cda5421726f54f3ae7ccb9ab35b847e062ccb97
 100644
--- a/gcc/doc/invoke.texi
+++ b/gcc/doc/invoke.texi
@@ -17157,21 +17157,13 @@ This option specifies the name of the target ARM 
processor for
 which GCC should tune the performance of the code.
 For some ARM implementations better performance can be obtained by using
 this option.
-Permissible names are: @samp{arm2}, @samp{arm250},
-@samp{arm3}, @samp{arm6}, @samp{arm60}, @samp{arm600}, @samp{arm610},
-@samp{arm620}, @samp{arm7}, @samp{arm7m}, @samp{arm7d}, @samp{arm7dm},
-@samp{arm7di}, @samp{arm7dmi}, @samp{arm70}, @samp{arm700},
-@samp{arm700i}, @samp{arm710}, @samp{arm710c}, @samp{arm7100},
-@samp{arm720},
-@samp{arm7500}, @samp{arm7500fe}, @samp{arm7tdmi}, @samp{arm7tdmi-s},
-@samp{arm710t}, @samp{arm720t}, @samp{arm740t},
-@samp{strongarm}, @samp{strongarm110}, @samp{strongarm1100},
-@samp{strongarm1110},
-@samp{arm8}, @samp{arm810}, @samp{arm9}, @samp{arm9e}, @samp{arm920},
-@samp{arm920t}, @samp{arm922t}, @samp{arm946e-s}, @samp{arm966e-s},
-@samp{arm968e-s}, @samp{arm926ej-s}, @samp{arm940t}, @samp{arm9tdmi},
-@samp{arm10tdmi}, @samp{arm1020t}, @samp{arm1026ej-s},
-@samp{arm10e}, @samp{arm1020e}, @samp{arm1022e},
+Permissible names are: @samp{arm7tdmi}, @samp{arm7tdmi-s}, @samp{arm710t},
+@samp{arm720t}, @samp{arm740t}, @samp{strongarm}, @samp{strongarm110},
+@samp{strongarm1100}, 0@samp{strongarm1110}, @samp{arm8}, @samp{arm810},
+@samp{arm9}, @samp{arm9e}, @samp{arm920}, @samp{arm920t}, @samp{arm922t},
+@samp{arm946e-s}, @samp{arm966e-s}, @samp{arm968e-s}, @samp{arm926ej-s},
+@samp{arm940t}, @samp{arm9tdmi}, @samp{arm10tdmi}, @samp{arm1020t},
+@samp{arm1026ej-s}, @samp{arm10e}, @samp{arm1020e}, @samp{arm1022e},
 @samp{arm1136j-s}, @samp{arm1136jf-s}, @samp{mpcore}, @samp{mpcorenovfp},
 @samp{arm1156t2-s}, @samp{arm1156t2f-s}, @samp{arm1176jz-s}, 
@samp{arm1176jzf-s},
 @samp{generic-armv7-a}, @samp{cortex-a5}, @samp{cortex-a7}, @samp{cortex-a8},
@@ -17180,22 +17172,12 @@ Permissible names are: @samp{arm2}, @samp{arm250},
 @samp{cortex-a57}, @samp{cortex-a72}, @samp{cortex-a73}, @samp{cortex-a75},
 @samp{cortex-a76}, @samp{ares}, @samp{cortex-r4}, @samp{cortex-r4f},
 @samp{cortex-r5}, @samp{cortex-r7}, @samp{cortex-r8}, @samp{cortex-r52},
-@samp{cortex-m33},
-@samp{cortex-m23},
-@samp{cortex-m7},
-@samp{cortex-m4},
-@samp{cortex-m3},
-@samp{cortex-m1},
-@samp{cortex-m0},
-@samp{cortex-m0plus},
-@samp{cortex-m1.small-multiply},
-@samp{cortex-m0.small-multiply},
-@samp{cortex-m0plus.small-multiply},
-@samp{exynos-m1},
-@samp{marvell-pj4},
-@samp{xscale}, @samp{iwmmxt}, @samp{iwmmxt2}, @samp{ep9312},
-@samp{fa526}, @samp{fa626},
-@samp{fa606te}, @samp{fa626te}, @samp{fmp626}, @samp{fa726te},
+@samp{cortex-m0}, @samp{cortex-m0plus}, @samp{cortex-m1}, @samp{cortex-m3},
+@samp{cortex-m4}, @samp{cortex-m7}, @samp{cortex-m23}, @samp{cortex-m33},
+@samp{cortex-m1.small-multiply}, @samp{cortex-m0.small-multiply},
+@samp{cortex-m0plus.small-multiply}, @samp{exynos-m1}, @samp{marvell-pj4},
+@samp{xscale}, @samp{iwmmxt}, @samp{iwmmxt2}, @samp{ep9312}, @samp{fa526},
+@samp{fa626}, @samp{fa606te}, @samp{fa626te}, @samp{fmp626}, @samp{fa726te},
 @samp{xgene1}.
 
 Additionally, this option can specify that GCC should tune the performance

Reply via email to