Hi Christophe,
>> not at all, but it has two problems:
>>
>> * The new branch_cost effective-target keyword needs documenting in
>> sourcebuild.texi, as always.
>>
>
> Sorry, I keep forgetting this. How about the trivial attached patch? (I'm
> mainly
> asking to check I add it to the most appro
On 12 January 2018 at 10:25, Rainer Orth wrote:
> Hi Christophe,
>
>> On 10 January 2018 at 15:44, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>>> On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 02:30:24PM +0200, Christophe Lyon wrote:
After Jakub's suggestion in PR82120 and PR81184, the attached patch
adds the -mbranch-cost option
Hi Christophe,
> On 10 January 2018 at 15:44, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 02:30:24PM +0200, Christophe Lyon wrote:
>>> After Jakub's suggestion in PR82120 and PR81184, the attached patch
>>> adds the -mbranch-cost option to the ARM target. My understanding
>>> is that it's int
On 10 January 2018 at 15:44, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 02:30:24PM +0200, Christophe Lyon wrote:
>> After Jakub's suggestion in PR82120 and PR81184, the attached patch
>> adds the -mbranch-cost option to the ARM target. My understanding
>> is that it's intended to be used inter
On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 02:30:24PM +0200, Christophe Lyon wrote:
> After Jakub's suggestion in PR82120 and PR81184, the attached patch
> adds the -mbranch-cost option to the ARM target. My understanding
> is that it's intended to be used internally for testing and does not
> require user-facing doc
Hi,
After Jakub's suggestion in PR82120 and PR81184, the attached patch
adds the -mbranch-cost option to the ARM target. My understanding
is that it's intended to be used internally for testing and does not
require user-facing documentation.
I have updated a few tests, validation on aarch64 & arm
