On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 12:40 PM, Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jan 04, 2017 at 12:27:09PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote: >> On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 8:27 PM, Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com> wrote: >> > Enum options should not allow negative form, otherwise the option handling >> > ICEs on it. -fsso-struct= allows only big-endian or little-endian, >> > -fno-sso-struct=big-endian or -fno-sso-struct=whatever makes no sense. >> > >> > Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux, ok for trunk? >> >> Ok, but maybe .opt processing can add RejectNegative on its own for >> Enum switches then? > > Rather than implicit RejectNegative it might be better to just diagnose > such options as invalid. If you agree, I can implement that as follow-up. > Also note that RejectNegative is only needed on the Enum switches that have > the default negatives (that is [Wfm] prefixed I think).
That would be nice. >> For the vectorizer we have (for backward compatibility): >> >> fvect-cost-model >> Common RejectNegative Alias(fvect-cost-model=,dynamic) >> Enables the dynamic vectorizer cost model. Preserved for backward >> compatibility. >> >> fno-vect-cost-model >> Common RejectNegative Alias(fvect-cost-model=,unlimited) >> Enables the unlimited vectorizer cost model. Preserved for backward >> compatibility. > > That is a non-= non-Enum option though. Yes, we do have the Enum variant (with RejectNegative) as well. > And not sure why this actually > is RejectNegative, wouldn't > Common Alias(fvect-cost-model=,dynamic,unlimited) > work just on fvect-cost-model (can test that)? Good question ;) If it works, ok. > In this case there is no -fsso-struct option (what would it mean), so > -fno-sso-struct isn't there either (again, what would that mean). > The only thing that would make sense IMHO would be to allow > not just big-endian and little-endian, but also native, so one can > cancel earlier -fsso-struct= like > gcc ... -fsso-struct=little-endian ... -fsso-struct=native ... > and have it act as if neither of those options appeared. > CCing Eric who has added this option. Yeah, I agree for -fsso-struct it doesn't make sense to have a -fno-sso-struct. For the vectorizer we transitioned from -f[no-]vect-cost-model to a tristate using an Enum and keeping the old form working was requied. Richard. > > Jakub
