In https://gcc.gnu.org/PR109954 I suggested also adding:
"N.B., using @option{-march} might be required to produce code suitable
for a specific CPU family, e.g., @option{-march=i486}."
I realise that that is true for all of -m32, -m64 and -mx32, and similar
rules apply for other targets too. But I still feel that saying it
explicitly for -m32 doesn't hurt, and would avoid a common
misunderstanding by putting that info somewhere it's more likely to be
read.
But I'd prefer to just fix the part that is *wrong*, and then we can
discuss whether or not that other part is an improvement. This patch
fixes the wrongness.
OK for trunk and release branches?
-- >8 --
This option does not imply -march=i386 so it's incorrect to say it
generates code that will run on "any i386 system".
gcc/ChangeLog:
PR target/109954
* doc/invoke.texi (x86 Options): Fix description of -m32 option.
---
gcc/doc/invoke.texi | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/gcc/doc/invoke.texi b/gcc/doc/invoke.texi
index 898a88ce33e..ec71c2e9e0f 100644
--- a/gcc/doc/invoke.texi
+++ b/gcc/doc/invoke.texi
@@ -34091,7 +34091,7 @@ on x86-64 processors in 64-bit environments.
Generate code for a 16-bit, 32-bit or 64-bit environment.
The @option{-m32} option sets @code{int}, @code{long}, and pointer types
to 32 bits, and
-generates code that runs on any i386 system.
+generates code that runs in 32-bit mode.
The @option{-m64} option sets @code{int} to 32 bits and @code{long} and pointer
types to 64 bits, and generates code for the x86-64 architecture.
--
2.40.1
