From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Message-ID: <17017.39523.745634.193331@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> Date: Thu, 5 May 2005 14:00:35 +1000 From: Paul Mackerras To: Dan Malek In-Reply-To: <45e21c1ae2899849665fb894a2adcc20@embeddededge.com> References: <17016.29775.224816.691409@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> <466e699745cf24e660e296530f6e34dc@embeddededge.com> <17017.16478.767293.191940@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> <45e21c1ae2899849665fb894a2adcc20@embeddededge.com> Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, trini@kernel.crashing.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Set cpu explicitly in kernel compiles List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Dan Malek writes: > The only reason I mentioned it is the "new" default behavior of the > compiler is appropriate for only a very small subset of the cores, Subset of which set of cores? Do you mean "small subset of 6xx cores" or "small subset of PPC cores"? I didn't change anything for non-6xx cores except to take out -mstring (if you really want that back, say so :). If you mean "small subset of 6xx cores" then are you objecting to the specific choice of "-mcpu=603 -mtune=7450", or what? > My concern wasn't specifically for which options I wanted, but > rather for the mechanism to set all of them now that it appears > we need to do that. We don't *need* to do it any more than we did before. It's easy to set options for 4xx, 8xx, etc. - just say the word. > OK, but we still need some kind of indication from the configuration > process. It seems to me it would be easier (and more logical) to > have the default behavior work like it has in the past, and use the > special options for the POWER4, which we already know in > the configuration. The problem isn't for POWER4, the problem is biarch gcc4 optimizing for POWER4 when we are compiling for 6xx. Paul.