This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

[AVX]: Use %vmovd instead of %vmovq


Hi,

I checked in a binutils patch to allow 64bit operands on vmovd:

http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2008-05/msg00257.html

I am checking this patch into AVX branch. Joey, Xuepeng, please
make sure that you have the latest binutils.

Thanks.


H.J.
--
On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 4:41 AM, Joseph S. Myers
<joseph@codesourcery.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 24 May 2008, H.J. Lu wrote:
>
>> 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.
>
> As I said in <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-09/msg01216.html> I
> think requiring a minimum version of binutils for all targets (except when
> not using GNU binutils, on a whitelist of targets where non-GNU tools are
> known to be usable or required) would be fine.  There would be a configure
> check that at least this version, or non-GNU tools where allowed, is in
> use, and all the statements in install.texi about older versions for
> particular targets would be removed.
>
> --
> Joseph S. Myers
> joseph@codesourcery.com
>



-- 
H.J.

Attachment: d.txt
Description: Text document


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]