diff options
| author | Kewen Lin <linkw@linux.ibm.com> | 2023-01-11 06:59:08 -0600 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Kewen Lin <linkw@linux.ibm.com> | 2023-01-11 06:59:08 -0600 |
| commit | 6224db0e4d6d3bd91cbf1767a971d4be86a39c55 (patch) | |
| tree | ab3cd52c1d40bf5f24d13ffdb02383b9165dea84 /gcc/function.cc | |
| parent | f99d7d669eaa2830eb5878df4da67e77ec791522 (diff) | |
| download | gcc-6224db0e4d6d3bd91cbf1767a971d4be86a39c55.zip gcc-6224db0e4d6d3bd91cbf1767a971d4be86a39c55.tar.gz gcc-6224db0e4d6d3bd91cbf1767a971d4be86a39c55.tar.bz2 | |
rs6000: Make P10_FUSION honour tuning setting
We noticed this issue when Segher reviewed the patch for
PR104024. When there is no explicit setting for option
-mpower10-fusion, we enable OPTION_MASK_P10_FUSION for
TARGET_POWER10. But it's not right, it should honour
tuning setting instead.
This patch is to fix it accordingly, it's bootstrapped
, and regtested on powerpc64-linux-gnu P8 and
powerpc64le-linux-gnu P9.
But on powerpc64le-linux-gnu P10 it had one regression
failure against the test case gcc.target/powerpc/pr105586.c.
I looked into it and confirmed that a latent bug was
exposed and filed one separated bug PR108273 instead.
gcc/ChangeLog:
* config/rs6000/rs6000.cc (rs6000_option_override_internal): Make
OPTION_MASK_P10_FUSION implicit setting honour Power10 tuning setting.
* config/rs6000/rs6000-cpus.def (ISA_3_1_MASKS_SERVER): Remove
OPTION_MASK_P10_FUSION.
Diffstat (limited to 'gcc/function.cc')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions