https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116854
--- Comment #12 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Thiago Macieira from comment #3) > The bug as reported is invalid, because it reported the wrong thing. The > problem has nothing to do with -march=native. The bug report is frustratingly unclear. > The problem is only -march=bdver4, which enables RDRND unconditionally. Yes, because that's what it's designed and documented to do. We don't want -march=bdver4 to mean different things on different machines, that's what -march=native is for. A named -march value should always mean the same thing. > Since the BIOS and/or OS can disable it, it stands to reason not all > Excavators have RDRND. GCC should not enable it unconditionally. So should this bug report be a request to change the meaning of bdver4? Because it's behaving as documented currently. Can we fix the summary to be more accurate? Would "-march=bdver4 should not enable RDRND" be better?
