On Tue, Jul 16, 2024 at 10:55:30AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Jul 2024, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Jul 16, 2024 at 10:43:27AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> > > I've pushed it to trunk now and am running local CPU 2017 to check for
> > > obvious fallout on Zen4 so we can make 14.2 RC early next week. There's
> > > still the question of GCC 11.5 which got the backport of zen4 support
> > > with this "wrong" costs but RC1 was already last week and we're set
> > > to release on Friday.
> > >
> > > I'd like to hear your opinion on that (13.3 and 12.4 also got the bogus
> > > value so eventually 11.5 getting the bogus value isn't too bad).
> > >
> > > Btw, I just see that znver5 tables have the same issue, I'll push the
> > > obvious change there as well.
> >
> > I'd just change 11.5 and do a RC2.
>
> I'm undecided on how important it is or whether it would need a RC, I
> don't expect anybody to use -march=znver4 with a GCC 11 code-base since
> it wasn't available there with 11.4.
-march=native is something people will actually use even with GCC 11 code
base and I've just tested that on znver4 box
~/xgcc -B ~/ -S -march=native -xc /dev/null -o /dev/null -v 2>&1 | sed -n
's/^.* \(-march=[0-9a-z]*\) .*$/\1/p'
-march=znver4
~/xgcc --version
xgcc (GCC) 11.4.1 20240620
Copyright (C) 2021 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO
warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
So, I think we really should fix this for 11.5.
Jakub
