On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 11:23 AM, Richard Biener <richard.guent...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 11:39 PM, H.J. Lu <hjl.to...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 5:09 AM, Andrew Senkevich >> <andrew.n.senkev...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> 2016-10-11 20:09 GMT+03:00 H.J. Lu <hjl.to...@gmail.com>: >>>> On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 10:04 AM, Andrew Senkevich >>>> <andrew.n.senkev...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> 2016-10-06 1:07 GMT+03:00 H.J. Lu <hjl.to...@gmail.com>: >>>>>> On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 1:42 PM, Andrew Senkevich >>>>>> <andrew.n.senkev...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> 2016-10-05 18:06 GMT+03:00 Uros Bizjak <ubiz...@gmail.com>: >>>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 3:47 PM, Andrew Senkevich >>>>>>>> <andrew.n.senkev...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> -mpcommit >>>>>>>>>> -Target Report Mask(ISA_PCOMMIT) Var(ix86_isa_flags) Save >>>>>>>>>> -Support PCOMMIT instruction. >>>>>>>>>> - >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> You should not simply delete a option that was in the released >>>>>>>>>> compiler, but a warning should be emitted instead. Please see how >>>>>>>>>> msse5 is handled in i386.opt. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thank you, it is fixed in patch below. Ok for trunk? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> OK. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Is it subject for backport for 5.* and 6.* releases? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Yes, but please wait a couple of days if any problem arises in trunk. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> (Please also provide an entry for Release Changes, since this is >>>>>>>> user-facing change. Also for release branches.) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi HJ, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> could you please commit this patch for trunk since I have no commit >>>>>>> rights. >>>>>>> Attached in format for git am. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Done. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, HJ! >>>>> >>>>> Should I ask you or somebody else for backports for to 5.* and 6.* or >>>>> may be I can somehow get commit after approval rights to don't disturb >>>>> others with commits? I am preparing several patches. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Please provide patches for GCC 5 and 6. >>> >>> Attached. >> >> I checked them into GCC 5 and GCC 6 branches. >> >>> Have you possibility to update according changes.html files? >>> >> >> Here is the patch for GCC 7. I am not sure what to do with GCC >> 5 and 6. > > There are entries for each sub-release (if not for the next then add one).
That said - why do we need to remove pcommit support on the branches at all? Richard. > Richard. > >> -- >> H.J. >> --- >> Index: gcc-7/changes.html >> =================================================================== >> RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/gcc-7/changes.html,v >> retrieving revision 1.18 >> diff -u -p -r1.18 changes.html >> --- gcc-7/changes.html 12 Oct 2016 11:08:25 -0000 1.18 >> +++ gcc-7/changes.html 13 Oct 2016 21:37:18 -0000 >> @@ -318,7 +318,14 @@ const int* get_address (unsigned idx) >> >> <!-- <h3 id="hsa">Heterogeneous Systems Architecture</h3> --> >> >> -<!-- <h3 id="x86">IA-32/x86-64</h3> --> >> +<h3 id="x86">IA-32/x86-64</h3> >> + <ul> >> + <li> >> + Support for >> + <a >> href="https://software.intel.com/en-us/blogs/2016/09/12/deprecate-pcommit-instruction";>deprecated</a> >> + pcommit instruction has been removed. >> + </li> >> + </ul> >> >> <!-- <h3 id="mips">MIPS</h3> -->
