On Wed, Feb 09, 2022 at 04:56:13PM +0800, Kewen.Lin wrote: > Hi Michael, > > on 2022/2/9 上午11:27, Michael Meissner via Gcc-patches wrote: > > Reset -mpower8-fusion for power9 inlining power8 functions, PR 102059. > > > > This patch is an attempt to make a much simpler patch to fix PR > > target/102059 > > than the previous patch. > > > > It just fixes the issue that if a function is specifically declared as a > > power8 > > function, you can't inline in functions that are specified with power9 or > > power10 options. > > > > The issue is -mpower8-fusion is cleared when you use -mcpu=power9 or > > -mcpu=power10. When I wrote the code for controlling which function can > > inline > > other functions, -mpower8-fusion was set for -mcpu=power9 (-mcpu=power10 was > > not an option at that time). This patch fixes this particular problem. > > > > Perhaps -mpower8-fusion should go away in the GCC 13 time frame. This patch > > just goes in and resets the fusion bit for testing inlines. > > > > I have built a bootstrapped little endian compiler on power9 and the tests > > had > > no regressions. > > > > I have built a bootstrapped big endian compiler on power8 and I tested both > > 32-bit and 64-bit builds, and there were no regressions. > > > > Can I install this into the trunk and back port it into GCC 11 after a > > burn-in > > period? > > > > Thanks for the patch! I guess we also need this for GCC 10 as:
Gcc 10 backport is doable once it is installed in the trunk. Since a lot of my work is on IEEE 128-bit or Power10, I don't always think of GCC 10 backports, but in this case, the patch is rather simple. Thanks for the reminder. -- Michael Meissner, IBM PO Box 98, Ayer, Massachusetts, USA, 01432 email: meiss...@linux.ibm.com
