On Tue, Feb 06, 2024 at 01:01:52AM -0500, Michael Meissner wrote: > > Nit: Named as "ISA_FUTURE_MASKS_SERVER" seems more accurate as it's > > constituted > > with ISA_3_1_MASKS_**SERVER** ... > > Well the _SERVER stuff was due to the power7 days when we still had to support > the E500 in the main rs6000 tree. But I will change it to be more consistant > in the future patches.
"_SERVER" still is a good shortish name for the server systems ;-) > > > @@ -67,7 +67,9 @@ enum processor_type > > > PROCESSOR_MPCCORE, > > > PROCESSOR_CELL, > > > PROCESSOR_PPCA2, > > > - PROCESSOR_TITAN > > > + PROCESSOR_TITAN, > > > + > > > > Nit: unintentional empty line? > > > > > + PROCESSOR_FUTURE > > > }; > > It was more as a separation. The MPCCORE, CELL, PPCA2, and TITAN are rather > old processors. I don't recall why we kept them after the POWER<x>. Please don't add random separations. > Logically we should re-order the list and move MPCCORE, etc. earlier, but I > will delete the blank line in future patches. Don't randomly reorder, either. _FUTURE should be added after POWER11. > > I think we should also update asm_names in driver-rs6000.cc. > > Ok. Though the driver-rs6000.cc stuff won't kick in until we have a real > system that matches "future". Or when during development you have that faked. You did test it, right? :-) Segher
