On 10/03/2014 04:31 PM, Andrey Turetskiy wrote:
I've applied your option patch on our offload branch (w/o
'-ftarget-options' switch yet) and it seems to be working fine.
However the patch looks a bit unfinished:
@@ -440,7 +554,11 @@ access_check (const char *name, int mode
static char*
pre
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 5:11 PM, Andrey Turetskiy
wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 3:19 PM, Bernd Schmidt
> wrote:
>> I have no objections to supporting a -ftarget-options switch. I had posted a
>> patch a while ago that looked somewhat similar, but also contained an
>> automatic translation ste
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 3:42 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> I don't like the == in there. Doesn't , being a target triplet
> or something like that, always have to start with alphanumeric character,
> and options always have to start with -? Thus, can't you decide from the
> first character after -f
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 03:16:52PM +0400, Andrey Turetskiy wrote:
> Hi,
> This patch (attached) contains the prototype of mechanism for passing
> options to offload target compiler.
> If one need to pass additional options for target compiler, one may
> add option ‘–ftarget-options==’ to host
> com
On 09/17/2014 01:16 PM, Andrey Turetskiy wrote:
How does this look? Do you agree with the approach?
I have no objections to supporting a -ftarget-options switch. I had
posted a patch a while ago that looked somewhat similar, but also
contained an automatic translation step from things like -
Hi,
This patch (attached) contains the prototype of mechanism for passing
options to offload target compiler.
If one need to pass additional options for target compiler, one may
add option ‘–ftarget-options==’ to host
compiler (target name can be skipped, that will append specified
options for ever
On 23 Jul 14:51, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> Ping.
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-06/msg00616.html
>
> On 06/06/2014 05:07 PM, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> >There's a problem when offloading from a compiler for one target machine
> >to another: the machine specific options don't necessarily matc
Ping.
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-06/msg00616.html
On 06/06/2014 05:07 PM, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
There's a problem when offloading from a compiler for one target machine
to another: the machine specific options don't necessarily match. This
patch tries to address this.
The idea is
There's a problem when offloading from a compiler for one target machine
to another: the machine specific options don't necessarily match. This
patch tries to address this.
The idea is that since we have two options sections anyway, with
different section name prefixes, we can arrange to pass
