On 3/30/22 11:02, Tobias Burnus wrote:
On 30.03.22 10:03, Tom de Vries wrote:
On 3/29/22 16:47, Tobias Burnus wrote:
I think it would be useful to have additionally some wording for the
(new in GCC 12/new since today) macros,
[...]
The macro is defined also if the option is not specified,
On 30.03.22 10:03, Tom de Vries wrote:
On 3/29/22 16:47, Tobias Burnus wrote:
I think it would be useful to have additionally some wording for the
(new in GCC 12/new since today) macros,
[...]
The macro is defined also if the option is not specified, so I think
this formulation is not 100%
On 3/29/22 16:47, Tobias Burnus wrote:
On 29.03.22 16:28, Tobias Burnus wrote:
On 29.03.22 15:39, Tom de Vries wrote:
Any comments?
I think it would be useful to have additionally some wording for the
(new in GCC 12/new since today) macros,
Agreed.
i.e. something like:
---
On 3/29/22 16:28, Tobias Burnus wrote:
Hi Tom,
On 29.03.22 15:39, Tom de Vries wrote:
Any comments?
+(e.g.@: @samp{sm_35}). Valid architecture strings are @samp{sm_30},
+@samp{sm_35}, @samp{sm_53} @samp{sm_70}, @samp{sm_75} and
+@samp{sm_80}. The default target architecture is sm_30.
On 29.03.22 16:28, Tobias Burnus wrote:
On 29.03.22 15:39, Tom de Vries wrote:
Any comments?
I think it would be useful to have additionally some wording for the
(new in GCC 12/new since today) macros, i.e. something like:
--- a/gcc/doc/invoke.texi
+++ b/gcc/doc/invoke.texi
@@ -27546,6
Hi Tom,
On 29.03.22 15:39, Tom de Vries wrote:
Any comments?
+(e.g.@: @samp{sm_35}). Valid architecture strings are @samp{sm_30},
+@samp{sm_35}, @samp{sm_53} @samp{sm_70}, @samp{sm_75} and
+@samp{sm_80}. The default target architecture is sm_30.
Missing comma (",") between sm_53 and sm_70.
Hi,
Update nvptx documentation:
- Use meaningful terms: "PTX ISA target architecture" and "PTX ISA version".
- Remove invalid claim that "ISA strings must be lower-case".
- Add missing sm_xx entries.
- Fix default ISA.
- Add march, copying misa doc.
- Declare misa an march alias.
- Add march-map.
