This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: RFC & patch: Rework MIPS command-line handling
At Tue, 16 Jul 2002 09:46:53 +0000 (UTC), "Richard Sandiford" wrote:
> Question: if gcc treats two processors as the same for scheduling,
> should they have the same _MIPS_ARCH and _MIPS_TUNE value? Like,
> should -march=r2000 and -march=r3000 set _MIPS_ARCH to the same
> value (_MIPS_R3000?) to reflect what GCC's doing, or should there
> be separate _MIPS_R2000 and _MIPS_R3000 defines? How about
> -mtune= and _MIPS_TUNE?
I'd say, if GCC recognizes different names for different processors,
it should use different defines for them (for both arch and tune).
The theory is that the application coder may know something (to be
expressed in asms) more than the compiler does.
r2k and r3k might be historical special cases, I don't know if there's
any practical difference between them for the purposes of such
defines... but for consistency, they should probably be given
different defines, IMO.
(Another way to look at this issue is, don't add arch names to the FSF
GCC unless users really may want to tell the difference. 8-)