[v2,1/4] options: Define TARGET_<NAME>_P and TARGET_<NAME>_OPTS_P macro for Mask and InverseMask
Checks
Commit Message
We TARGET_<NAME>_P marcro to test a Mask and InverseMask with user
specified target_variable, however we may want to test with specific
gcc_options variable rather than target_variable.
Like RISC-V has defined lots of Mask with TargetVariable, which is not
easy to use, because that means we need to known which Mask are associate with
which TargetVariable, so take a gcc_options variable is a better interface
for such use case.
gcc/ChangeLog:
* doc/options.texi (Mask): Document TARGET_<NAME>_P and
TARGET_<NAME>_OPTS_P.
(InverseMask): Ditto.
* opth-gen.awk (Mask): Generate TARGET_<NAME>_P and
TARGET_<NAME>_OPTS_P macro.
(InverseMask): Ditto.
---
gcc/doc/options.texi | 23 ++++++++++++++++-------
gcc/opth-gen.awk | 13 ++++++++++++-
2 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
Comments
On 10/9/23 22:13, Kito Cheng wrote:
> We TARGET_<NAME>_P marcro to test a Mask and InverseMask with user
> specified target_variable, however we may want to test with specific
> gcc_options variable rather than target_variable.
>
> Like RISC-V has defined lots of Mask with TargetVariable, which is not
> easy to use, because that means we need to known which Mask are associate with
> which TargetVariable, so take a gcc_options variable is a better interface
> for such use case.
>
> gcc/ChangeLog:
>
> * doc/options.texi (Mask): Document TARGET_<NAME>_P and
> TARGET_<NAME>_OPTS_P.
> (InverseMask): Ditto.
> * opth-gen.awk (Mask): Generate TARGET_<NAME>_P and
> TARGET_<NAME>_OPTS_P macro.
> (InverseMask): Ditto.
OK assuming it passes a build cycle on x86 or some other common target.
jeff
Thanks, committed, and just did one more check with x86 again, it
works as well, hope no more awk portable issue this time :P
On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 6:51 AM Jeff Law <jeffreyalaw@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 10/9/23 22:13, Kito Cheng wrote:
> > We TARGET_<NAME>_P marcro to test a Mask and InverseMask with user
> > specified target_variable, however we may want to test with specific
> > gcc_options variable rather than target_variable.
> >
> > Like RISC-V has defined lots of Mask with TargetVariable, which is not
> > easy to use, because that means we need to known which Mask are associate with
> > which TargetVariable, so take a gcc_options variable is a better interface
> > for such use case.
> >
> > gcc/ChangeLog:
> >
> > * doc/options.texi (Mask): Document TARGET_<NAME>_P and
> > TARGET_<NAME>_OPTS_P.
> > (InverseMask): Ditto.
> > * opth-gen.awk (Mask): Generate TARGET_<NAME>_P and
> > TARGET_<NAME>_OPTS_P macro.
> > (InverseMask): Ditto.
> OK assuming it passes a build cycle on x86 or some other common target.
>
> jeff
../../../../gcc/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.cc:8142:18: error: ‘TARGET_MIN_VLEN_OPTS’ was not declared in this scope
int min_vlen = TARGET_MIN_VLEN_OPTS (opts);
juzhe.zhong@rivai.ai
From: Kito Cheng
Date: 2023-10-12 05:20
To: Jeff Law
CC: Kito Cheng; gcc-patches; palmer; rdapp; juzhe.zhong
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] options: Define TARGET_<NAME>_P and TARGET_<NAME>_OPTS_P macro for Mask and InverseMask
Thanks, committed, and just did one more check with x86 again, it
works as well, hope no more awk portable issue this time :P
On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 6:51 AM Jeff Law <jeffreyalaw@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 10/9/23 22:13, Kito Cheng wrote:
> > We TARGET_<NAME>_P marcro to test a Mask and InverseMask with user
> > specified target_variable, however we may want to test with specific
> > gcc_options variable rather than target_variable.
> >
> > Like RISC-V has defined lots of Mask with TargetVariable, which is not
> > easy to use, because that means we need to known which Mask are associate with
> > which TargetVariable, so take a gcc_options variable is a better interface
> > for such use case.
> >
> > gcc/ChangeLog:
> >
> > * doc/options.texi (Mask): Document TARGET_<NAME>_P and
> > TARGET_<NAME>_OPTS_P.
> > (InverseMask): Ditto.
> > * opth-gen.awk (Mask): Generate TARGET_<NAME>_P and
> > TARGET_<NAME>_OPTS_P macro.
> > (InverseMask): Ditto.
> OK assuming it passes a build cycle on x86 or some other common target.
>
> jeff
Oh, my bad seem like that was in later patch, let me fix now
钟居哲 <juzhe.zhong@rivai.ai> 於 2023年10月11日 週三 15:49 寫道：
> ../../../../gcc/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.cc:8142:18: error:
> ‘TARGET_MIN_VLEN_OPTS’ was not declared in this scope
> int min_vlen = TARGET_MIN_VLEN_OPTS (opts);
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> juzhe.zhong@rivai.ai
>
>
> *From:* Kito Cheng <kito.cheng@gmail.com>
> *Date:* 2023-10-12 05:20
> *To:* Jeff Law <jeffreyalaw@gmail.com>
> *CC:* Kito Cheng <kito.cheng@sifive.com>; gcc-patches
> <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>; palmer <palmer@dabbelt.com>; rdapp
> <rdapp@ventanamicro.com>; juzhe.zhong <juzhe.zhong@rivai.ai>
> *Subject:* Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] options: Define TARGET_<NAME>_P and
> TARGET_<NAME>_OPTS_P macro for Mask and InverseMask
> Thanks, committed, and just did one more check with x86 again, it
> works as well, hope no more awk portable issue this time :P
>
> On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 6:51 AM Jeff Law <jeffreyalaw@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On 10/9/23 22:13, Kito Cheng wrote:
> > > We TARGET_<NAME>_P marcro to test a Mask and InverseMask with user
> > > specified target_variable, however we may want to test with specific
> > > gcc_options variable rather than target_variable.
> > >
> > > Like RISC-V has defined lots of Mask with TargetVariable, which is not
> > > easy to use, because that means we need to known which Mask are
> associate with
> > > which TargetVariable, so take a gcc_options variable is a better
> interface
> > > for such use case.
> > >
> > > gcc/ChangeLog:
> > >
> > > * doc/options.texi (Mask): Document TARGET_<NAME>_P and
> > > TARGET_<NAME>_OPTS_P.
> > > (InverseMask): Ditto.
> > > * opth-gen.awk (Mask): Generate TARGET_<NAME>_P and
> > > TARGET_<NAME>_OPTS_P macro.
> > > (InverseMask): Ditto.
> > OK assuming it passes a build cycle on x86 or some other common target.
> >
> > jeff
>
>
>
Fixed, sorry for disturbing trunk
On Wed, Oct 11, 2023 at 3:50 PM Kito Cheng <kito.cheng@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Oh, my bad seem like that was in later patch, let me fix now
>
> 钟居哲 <juzhe.zhong@rivai.ai> 於 2023年10月11日 週三 15:49 寫道：
>>
>> ../../../../gcc/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.cc:8142:18: error: ‘TARGET_MIN_VLEN_OPTS’ was not declared in this scope
>> int min_vlen = TARGET_MIN_VLEN_OPTS (opts);
>>
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>> juzhe.zhong@rivai.ai
>>
>>
>> From: Kito Cheng
>> Date: 2023-10-12 05:20
>> To: Jeff Law
>> CC: Kito Cheng; gcc-patches; palmer; rdapp; juzhe.zhong
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] options: Define TARGET_<NAME>_P and TARGET_<NAME>_OPTS_P macro for Mask and InverseMask
>> Thanks, committed, and just did one more check with x86 again, it
>> works as well, hope no more awk portable issue this time :P
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 6:51 AM Jeff Law <jeffreyalaw@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On 10/9/23 22:13, Kito Cheng wrote:
>> > > We TARGET_<NAME>_P marcro to test a Mask and InverseMask with user
>> > > specified target_variable, however we may want to test with specific
>> > > gcc_options variable rather than target_variable.
>> > >
>> > > Like RISC-V has defined lots of Mask with TargetVariable, which is not
>> > > easy to use, because that means we need to known which Mask are associate with
>> > > which TargetVariable, so take a gcc_options variable is a better interface
>> > > for such use case.
>> > >
>> > > gcc/ChangeLog:
>> > >
>> > > * doc/options.texi (Mask): Document TARGET_<NAME>_P and
>> > > TARGET_<NAME>_OPTS_P.
>> > > (InverseMask): Ditto.
>> > > * opth-gen.awk (Mask): Generate TARGET_<NAME>_P and
>> > > TARGET_<NAME>_OPTS_P macro.
>> > > (InverseMask): Ditto.
>> > OK assuming it passes a build cycle on x86 or some other common target.
>> >
>> > jeff
>>
@@ -404,18 +404,27 @@ You may also specify @code{Var} to select a variable other than
The options-processing script will automatically allocate a unique bit
for the option. If the option is attached to @samp{target_flags} or @code{Var}
which is defined by @code{TargetVariable}, the script will set the macro
-@code{MASK_@var{name}} to the appropriate bitmask. It will also declare a
-@code{TARGET_@var{name}} macro that has the value 1 when the option is active
-and 0 otherwise. If you use @code{Var} to attach the option to a different variable
-which is not defined by @code{TargetVariable}, the bitmask macro with be
-called @code{OPTION_MASK_@var{name}}.
+@code{MASK_@var{name}} to the appropriate bitmask. It will also declare a
+@code{TARGET_@var{name}}, @code{TARGET_@var{name}_P} and
+@code{TARGET_@var{name}_OPTS_P}: @code{TARGET_@var{name}} macros that has the
+value 1 when the option is active and 0 otherwise, @code{TARGET_@var{name}_P} is
+similar to @code{TARGET_@var{name}} but take an argument as @samp{target_flags}
+or @code{TargetVariable}, and @code{TARGET_@var{name}_OPTS_P} also similar to
+@code{TARGET_@var{name}} but take an argument as @code{gcc_options}.
+If you use @code{Var} to attach the option to a different variable which is not
+defined by @code{TargetVariable}, the bitmask macro with be called
+@code{OPTION_MASK_@var{name}}.
@item InverseMask(@var{othername})
@itemx InverseMask(@var{othername}, @var{thisname})
The option is the inverse of another option that has the
@code{Mask(@var{othername})} property. If @var{thisname} is given,
-the options-processing script will declare a @code{TARGET_@var{thisname}}
-macro that is 1 when the option is active and 0 otherwise.
+the options-processing script will declare @code{TARGET_@var{thisname}},
+@code{TARGET_@var{name}_P} and @code{TARGET_@var{name}_OPTS_P} macros:
+@code{TARGET_@var{thisname}} is 1 when the option is active and 0 otherwise,
+@code{TARGET_@var{name}_P} is similar to @code{TARGET_@var{name}} but take an
+argument as @samp{target_flags}, and and @code{TARGET_@var{name}_OPTS_P} also
+similar to @code{TARGET_@var{name}} but take an argument as @code{gcc_options}.
@item Enum(@var{name})
The option's argument is a string from the set of strings associated
@@ -439,6 +439,10 @@ for (i = 0; i < n_target_vars; i++)
{
print "#define TARGET_" other_masks[i "," j] \
" ((" target_vars[i] " & MASK_" other_masks[i "," j] ") != 0)"
+ print "#define TARGET_" other_masks[i "," j] "_P(" target_vars[i] ")" \
+ " (((" target_vars[i] ") & MASK_" other_masks[i "," j] ") != 0)"
+ print "#define TARGET_" other_masks[i "," j] "_OPTS_P(opts)" \
+ " (((opts->x_" target_vars[i] ") & MASK_" other_masks[i "," j] ") != 0)"
}
}
print ""
@@ -469,15 +473,22 @@ for (i = 0; i < n_opts; i++) {
" ((" vname " & " mask original_name ") != 0)"
print "#define TARGET_" name "_P(" vname ")" \
" (((" vname ") & " mask original_name ") != 0)"
+ print "#define TARGET_" name "_OPTS_P(opts)" \
+ " (((opts->x_" vname ") & " mask original_name ") != 0)"
print "#define TARGET_EXPLICIT_" name "_P(opts)" \
" ((opts->x_" vname "_explicit & " mask original_name ") != 0)"
print "#define SET_TARGET_" name "(opts) opts->x_" vname " |= " mask original_name
}
}
for (i = 0; i < n_extra_masks; i++) {
- if (extra_mask_macros[extra_masks[i]] == 0)
+ if (extra_mask_macros[extra_masks[i]] == 0) {
print "#define TARGET_" extra_masks[i] \
" ((target_flags & MASK_" extra_masks[i] ") != 0)"
+ print "#define TARGET_" extra_masks[i] "_P(target_flags)" \
+ " (((target_flags) & " extra_masks[i] ") != 0)"
+ print "#define TARGET_" extra_masks[i] "_OPTS_P(opts)" \
+ " (((opts->x_target_flags) & MASK_" extra_masks[i] ") != 0)"
+ }
}
print ""