On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 09:42:05PM -0400, David Edelsohn wrote:
> @@ -1115,7 +1118,8 @@ static const struct attribute_spec rs600
> { NULL, 0, 0, false, false, false, NULL, false }
> };
>
> -#ifndef MASK_STRICT_ALIGN
> +#ifndef OPTION_MASK_STRICT_ALIGN
> +#define OPTION_MASK_STRICT_ALIGN 0
> #define MASK_STRICT_ALIGN 0
> #endif
> #ifndef TARGET_PROFILE_KERNEL
>
> Why does this fragment define OPTION_MASK_STRICT_ALIGN but does not
> remove definition of MASK_STRICT_ALIGN?
To amplify a little bit more, in the first patch, I completely removed all
MASK_<xxx> names. However, this causes rs6000-cpus.def to be completely
rewritten, and as you point out, that makes it very hard to verify that we are
getting the same behavior.
So in the second patch, I added mappings from OPTION_MASK_<xxx> to MASK_<xxx>
so that rs6000-cpus.def would not change, but in the places where I changed
target_flags to rs6000_isa_flags, I also changed to use the new names.
These code fragments in rs6000.h are for the non-linux systems that don't use
the sysv4.opt switches (which provides -mstrict-align, and hence defines
MASK_STRICT_ALIGN or OPTION_MASK_STRICT_ALIGN in the new scheme).
> Similarly for
>
> -#ifndef MASK_64BIT
> +#ifndef OPTION_MASK_64BIT
> +#define OPTION_MASK_64BIT 0
> #define MASK_64BIT 0
> #endif
>
> Why define both OPTION_MASK_64BIT and MASK_64BIT?
This is for the embedded targets that don't handle the switches from sysv4.opt
nor aix64.opt that define the respective -m64 and -maix64 options.
--
Michael Meissner, IBM
5 Technology Place Drive, M/S 2757, Westford, MA 01886-3141, USA
meiss...@linux.vnet.ibm.com fax +1 (978) 399-6899
