On Tue, Apr 01, 2025 at 01:36:23PM +0800, Hongtao Liu wrote:
> >Changing ix86_valid_target_attribute_inner_p might be even better because
> >OPT_msse4 is RejectNegative option, so !value for it looks weird.
> msse4 is defined as ix86_opt_isa in ix86_valid_target_attribute_inner_p
>
> 1055 IX86_ATTR_ISA ("sse4", OPT_msse4),
>
> and would be handled in ix86_handle_option
>
> 1282 else if (type == ix86_opt_isa)
> 1283 {
> 1284 struct cl_decoded_option decoded;
> 1285
> 1286 generate_option (opt, NULL, opt_set_p, CL_TARGET,
> &decoded);
> 1287 ix86_handle_option (opts, opts_set,
> 1288 &decoded, input_location);
> 1289 }
>
> So I think it's already correct here.
The entries are
msse4
Target RejectNegative Mask(ISA_SSE4_2) Var(ix86_isa_flags) Save
Support MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1 and SSE4.2 built-in functions and
code generation.
mno-sse4
Target RejectNegative InverseMask(ISA_SSE4_1) Var(ix86_isa_flags) Save
Do not support SSE4.1 and SSE4.2 built-in functions and code generation.
so if it is turned into something without RejectNegative,
it will be wrong in the Mask argument, either for the positive or for the
negative case.
I wonder though if msse4 should not be a Target RejectNegative Alias to msse4.2
and mno-sse4 RejectNegative Alias to mno-sse4.1.
Though, unsure if one will still be able to specify it in #pragma GCC target
or target attribute...
Jakub
