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