https://gcc.gnu.org/g:de47c5206f95dc76f1c087cbd212aad11b810315

commit de47c5206f95dc76f1c087cbd212aad11b810315
Author: Michael Meissner <[email protected]>
Date:   Mon Nov 24 21:30:29 2025 -0500

    Update ChangeLog.*

Diff:
---
 gcc/ChangeLog.meissner | 84 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 84 insertions(+)

diff --git a/gcc/ChangeLog.meissner b/gcc/ChangeLog.meissner
index f35a8cbac9e6..4a715215abdf 100644
--- a/gcc/ChangeLog.meissner
+++ b/gcc/ChangeLog.meissner
@@ -1,3 +1,87 @@
+==================== Branch work229, patch #2 ====================
+
+Use vector pair load/store for memcpy with -mcpu=future
+
+In the development for the power10 processor, GCC did not enable using the load
+vector pair and store vector pair instructions when optimizing things like
+memory copy.  This patch enables using those instructions if -mcpu=future is
+used.
+
+I have tested these patches on both big endian and little endian PowerPC
+servers, with no regressions.  Can I check these patchs into the trunk?
+
+2025-11-14  Michael Meissner  <[email protected]>
+
+gcc/
+
+       * config/rs6000/rs6000-cpus.def (FUTURE_MASKS_SERVER): Enable using load
+       vector pair and store vector pair instructions for memory copy
+       operations.
+       (POWERPC_MASKS): Make the option for enabling using load vector pair and
+       store vector pair operations set and reset when the PowerPC processor is
+       changed.
+       * gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.cc (rs6000_machine_from_flags): Disable
+       -mblock-ops-vector-pair from influencing .machine selection.
+
+gcc/testsuite/
+
+       * gcc.target/powerpc/future-3.c: New test.
+
+==================== Branch work229, patch #1 ====================
+
+Add -mcpu=future.
+
+I originally made a more complicated patch (V5) on September 22nd, 2025
+that tried to do infrastructure cleanup as well as adding -mcpu=future.
+This patch is a more limited patch in that it just adds the
+-mcpu=future patch, and it does not do the other infrastructure work.
+
+I submitted version 6 of the patch on November 6th.
+
+However, in that patch, I forgot to add code to set the .machine
+directive to "future" if the user did -mcpu=future and I submitted
+version 7 on November 7th.
+
+This is version 8 of the -mcpu=future patch.  It goes back to the old
+method of adding -mcpu=<xxx> options by adding a new ISA bit for that
+processor.
+
+If the user uses -mcpu=future, -mfuture is passed to the assembler.
+
+I added support so the configuration option --with-cpu=future is used,
+it will set the default cpu type.
+
+Can I check this patch into the GCC trunk?  I have built bootstrap
+builds on both a little endian Power10 system and a big endian Power9
+system and there were no regressions.  On the little endian Power10
+system, I built the last run using the --with-cpu=future configuration
+option.
+
+2025-11-14  Michael Meissner  <[email protected]>
+
+gcc/
+
+       * config.gcc (powerpc*-*-*): Add support for -mcpu=future.
+       * config/rs6000/aix71.h (ASM_CPU_SPEC): Add support for -mcpu=future.
+       * config/rs6000/aix72.h (ASM_CPU_SPEC): Likewise.
+       * config/rs6000/aix73.h (ASM_CPU_SPEC): Likewise.
+       * config/rs6000/rs6000-c.cc (rs6000_target_modify_macros): Define
+       _ARCH_FUTURE if -mcpu=future.
+       * config/rs6000/rs6000-cpus.def (FUTURE_MASKS_SERVER): New macros.
+       (POWERPC_MASKS): Add OPTION_MASK_FUTURE.
+       * config/rs6000/rs6000-tables.opt: Regenerate.
+       (future processor): Add -mcpu=future.
+       * config/rs6000/rs6000-opts.h (PROCESSOR_FUTURE): Define as power11.
+       * config/rs6000/rs6000.h (ASM_CPU_SPEC): Add support for -mcpu=future.
+       * config/rs6000/rs6000.opt (-mfuture): New option.
+       * doc/invoke.texi (IBM RS/6000 and PowerPC Options): Document
+       -mcpu=future.
+
+gcc/testsuite/
+
+       * gcc.target/powerpc/future-1.c: New test.
+       * gcc.target/powerpc/future-2.c: Likewise.
+
 ==================== Branch work229, baseline ====================
 
 2025-11-21   Michael Meissner  <[email protected]>

Reply via email to