On Jul 24, 2013, at 1:36 AM, William Harrington wrote:
I"m also curious, do we need to build ISL and CLooG in cross-tools?
It seems best that optimized binaries would be using the graphite
toolchain from tools and then final-system. I see no need to build
graphite in the cross-tools. It would make sense to enable graphite
in the tools, and definitely in final-system.
Okay, I've verified, using x86 for a powerpc target that it isn't
possible to build a temp system with graphite options.
I do not know if graphite options can be used when cross compiling,
but it seems it can't be. Now, it may work fine when the host system
is the same arch as the target system, such as ppc to ppc or x86 to
x86, however, from x86 to ppc it seems graphite options can't be
enabled.
A message during configure after an attempted compiler check:
sorry, unimplemented: Graphite loop optimizations cannot be used (-
fgraphite, -fgraphite-identity, -floop-block, -floop-interchange, -
floop-strip-mine, -floop-parallelize-all, and -ftree-loop-linear
I have more testing to do. But if this is for sure exact, then we do
not need cloog and isl in cross-tools or tools.
Now, the only reason to use it in tools, is when starting the final
system and someone wants to use graphite options before rebuliding gcc.
Can anyone else confirm this?
Sincerely,
WIlliam Harrington
_______________________________________________
Clfs-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cross-lfs.org/listinfo.cgi/clfs-dev-cross-lfs.org
