Hi Richard Thanks for your help.
> Would you like the patch to be backported further than GCC 10? > Does the attached patch to document the addition to GCC 10.3 look OK? I will reply to you after the internal discussion. Regards, Qian Richard Sandiford <richard.sandif...@arm.com> writes: >Qian Jianhua <qia...@cn.fujitsu.com> writes: >> This patch add support for Fujitsu A64FX, as the first step of adding >> A64FX machine model. >> >> A64FX is used in FUJITSU Supercomputer PRIMEHPC FX1000, PRIMEHPC >> FX700, and supercomputer Fugaku. >> The official microarchitecture information of A64FX can be read at >> https://github.com/fujitsu/A64FX. >> >> Changelog: >> 2020-08-03 Qian jianhua <qia...@cn.fujitsu.com> >> >> * config/aarch64/aarch64-cores.def: Add the chip name. >> * config/aarch64/aarch64-tune.md: Regenerated. >> * config/aarch64/aarch64.c: Add tuning table for the chip. >> * doc/invoke.texi: Add the new name to the list. >> >> Test results: >> * Bootstrap on aarch64 ------------------------------- [OK] >> * Regression tests ----------------------------------- [OK] >> * Compile with -mcpu=a64fx --------------------------- [OK] > >Thanks for doing this, looks great. Pushed to trunk and the GCC 10 branch. > >Would you like the patch to be backported further than GCC 10? I wasn't sure >whether GCC 9 and earlier would be useful, given that those releases didn't >support the ACLE and were missing optimisations that went into GCC 10. > >Very minor, but I tweaked the changelog entry slightly to: > >2020-08-03 Qian jianhua <qia...@cn.fujitsu.com> > >gcc/ >* config/aarch64/aarch64-cores.def (a64fx): New core. >* config/aarch64/aarch64-tune.md: Regenerated. >* config/aarch64/aarch64.c (a64fx_prefetch_tune, a64fx_tunings): New. >* doc/invoke.texi: Add a64fx to the list. > >before committing. The changelog entries are automatically applied to files >like gcc/ChangeLog on a nightly basis, and doing that would lose the context >in the covering message about which chip the patch is supporting. > >Does the attached patch to document the addition to GCC 10.3 look OK? >We'll need something similar for GCC 11, but personally I tend to prefer >adding the notes closer to the release. > >Thanks, >Richard
