This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH] A new meta intrinsic header file for current and future x86 instrinsics.
- From: "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>
- To: "Chris Lattner" <clattner at apple dot com>
- Cc: "rajagopal, dwarak" <dwarak dot rajagopal at amd dot com>, "Uros Bizjak" <ubizjak at gmail dot com>, "Richard Guenther" <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>, "Guo, Xuepeng" <xuepeng dot guo at intel dot com>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, jakub at redhat dot com, "Ye, Joey" <joey dot ye at intel dot com>, "Lin, Weiliang" <weiliang dot lin at intel dot com>, "Harle, Christophe" <christophe dot harle at amd dot com>, "Sebastian Pop" <sebpop at gmail dot com>
- Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2008 16:20:13 -0800
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] A new meta intrinsic header file for current and future x86 instrinsics.
- References: <820531547ADB6847AF89CC220F6128F1737F@pdsmsx001.ccr.corp.intel.com> <9E1304B144EBEB4C97F4162BFAC4788602D3AAC8@SAUSEXMB2.amd.com> <email@example.com> <EDA71DF9-E597-4F94-BE64-B3C9CA6E4BCE@apple.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <5659869B-5D04-44A3-A1B5-FD125FDDF765@apple.com> <email@example.com> <4613DBA9-BF19-429F-9B8F-57F8F967940B@apple.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <CA9EADC1-DA94-4025-8CB3-796FF65FD0E5@apple.com>
On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 3:47 PM, Chris Lattner <email@example.com> wrote:
> On Nov 21, 2008, at 1:59 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 1:48 PM, Chris Lattner <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>>> On Nov 21, 2008, at 12:23 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>>>> Your approach assumes there is value to having immtrin.h and
>>>>> What value do you see there? What audience are you serving?
>>>>> If there is no reason to have immtrin.h, there is no reason to proceed
>>>>> this approach.
>>>> There are always Xmmintrin.h for SSEs. We just added immintrin.h for
>>> So "immintrin.h" is defined as "the header you #include for AVX", not as
>>> "the header you #include to get current and future intel features"?
>> What difference does it make?
> If AMD or another X86 vendor supports AVX some day, we need a header for
> AVX. This header should be AVX only, not "random stuff intel has added in
> the last 10 years".
Please take a look at what in gcc trunk today. The current structure supports
it with a 2 line change.
> This is exactly the situation with the xmmintrin.h headers. What problem
> are you trying to solve by deviating from the standard and established
The standard and established practice is to add a new
Xmmintrin.h, which is immintrin.h, for a new ISA extension.