Re: Why no -march=athlon?

From: M. R. Brown (mrbrown@0xd6.org)
Date: Mon Dec 17 2001 - 12:40:20 EST

Next message: Joseph Pingenot: "USB [Toshiba PCX1100U CableModem] panic"
Previous message: Andreas Dilger: "Re: amber/mars & ext3"
In reply to: nbecker@fred.net: "Why no -march=athlon?"
Next in thread: Benoit Poulot-Cazajous: "On K7, -march=k6 is good (Was Re: Why no -march=athlon?)"
Reply: Benoit Poulot-Cazajous: "On K7, -march=k6 is good (Was Re: Why no -march=athlon?)"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

* nbecker@fred.net <nbecker@fred.net> on Mon, Dec 17, 2001:

> I noticed that linux/arch/i386/Makefile says:
>
> ifdef CONFIG_MK7
> CFLAGS += -march=i686 -malign-functions=4
> endif
>
>
> Why not -march=athlon? Is this just for compatibility with old gcc?

The recommend kernel compiler is gcc 2.95.x, which doesn't support
"-march=athlon".

> If so, can't we fix it with an ifdef?

Can you fix it? You'd have to parse the output of `gcc -v`, I think
kbuild 2.5 does this, so start there first.

M. R.

application/pgp-signature attachment: stored

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: Joseph Pingenot: "USB [Toshiba PCX1100U CableModem] panic"
Previous message: Andreas Dilger: "Re: amber/mars & ext3"
In reply to: nbecker@fred.net: "Why no -march=athlon?"
Next in thread: Benoit Poulot-Cazajous: "On K7, -march=k6 is good (Was Re: Why no -march=athlon?)"
Reply: Benoit Poulot-Cazajous: "On K7, -march=k6 is good (Was Re: Why no -march=athlon?)"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Dec 23 2001 - 21:00:13 EST