Hi Maciej: Thanks for sharing your experience on MIPS, that sounds like just opposite derived directions to this scheme.
> The MIPS port used to have `-mcpu=' as well, which used to be roughly > equivalent to modern `-mtune='; from your description I gather `-mcpu=' is > going to be roughly equivalent to a combination of `-mtune=' and `-march=' > setting DFA scheduling for a specific CPU and the instruction set to the > underlying architecture Yes, -mcpu= -mtune + march is what I would like to do, and that's what RISC-V clang/LLVM do currently, although RISC-V clang/LLVM didn't have -mtune options yet, but I plan to implement one to make two compiler interfaces more closer. > (do we plan to allow vendor extensions?). I guess vendor extensions supporting is another big issue for RISC-V GCC... :P > In which case to compile a set of CPU-specific modules to be linked together > (e.g. individual platform support in a generic piece of software like an > OS kernel or a bare metal library) you'll always have to specify the ABI > explicitly (though maybe you want anyway, hmm). > > FWIW, > > Maciej
