This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
RFC: Can I require binutils 2.17 or above for AVX support in gcc?
- From: "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>
- To: "Gcc Patch List" <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, "Ye, Joey" <joey dot ye at intel dot com>, "Guo, Xuepeng" <xuepeng dot guo at intel dot com>
- Date: Sat, 24 May 2008 10:04:42 -0700
- Subject: RFC: Can I require binutils 2.17 or above for AVX support in gcc?
Hi,
Binutils 2.17 and above supports both
movq %rax, %xmm0
movd %rax, %xmm0
AVX has vmovq and no vmovd. To add AVX vmovq supportt to
patterns with movd, I have 2 choices:
1. Add a new AVX pattern with vmovq. Or
2. Requiring binutils 2..17 or above, replace movd with
%vmovq without adding a new pattern.
Requiring binutils 2.17 or above also improves gcc code
generation due to better linker. I certainly prefer #2. But I
can live with #1.
BTW, I can add "vmovd" to x86 assembler as the last resort.
Thanks.
H.J.