On Wed, Nov 17, 2021 at 11:45:02AM -0600, Paul A. Clarke wrote: > I guess I'm being pedantic. "requires -mcpu=power8 and -mvsx" is not > accurate from a user's point a view, as "-mcpu=power8" is sufficient, > since "-mvsx" is enabled when "-mcpu=power8" is specified.
To be really pedantic, -mcpu=power8 isn't required either: anythng that enable the subset of ISA 2.07 that is needed is enough already. But we don't want to encourage users to use those interfaces. > The real "requires" is "-mcpu=power8" and no "-mno-vsx". And no -mno-altivec. And and and. There is a huge web. > It's not a strong objection, since specifying "-mno-vsx" should be > uncommon. (Right?) And, specifying "-mcpu=power8 -mvsx" is harmless. Maybe the warning could say "requires -mcpu=power8 (and -mvsx)"? Is that clearer, to your eye? Segher
