This is the mail archive of the gcc@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]

Re: IA64 inline division question

From: Al Stone <ahs3 at fc dot hp dot com>
To: Gerald Pfeifer <gp at suse dot de>
Cc: Vladimir Makarov <vmakarov at redhat dot com>,Steve Ellcey <sje at cup dot hp dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org,Andreas Schwab <schwab at suse dot de>
Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2004 14:09:50 -0700
Subject: Re: IA64 inline division question
Organization: Hewlett-Packard
References: <200402051841.KAA15925@hpsje.cup.hp.com> <402299CE.3060002@redhat.com> <Pine.LNX.4.58.0402052052160.23473@lifschitz.suse.de>
Reply-to: ahs3 at fc dot hp dot com

On Thu, 2004-02-05 at 13:03, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Feb 2004, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
> > According to Intel's documentation of Itanium2 it should 
> > be fmac.  So we could change it to fmac if Itanium1 has no problems. 
> 
> Do we really need to care for Itanium1 in the context of GCC 3.5?
> 
> Personally, I really wouldn't care about anything older than McKinley 
> for GCC 3.5, but YMMV.  Andreas, what do you think?
> 
> > Unfortunately I have no available Itanium1, so can not check this.
> 
> Andreas and me have.

And I have several, too (not all of them in use, tho').

> Gerald
-- 
Ciao,
al
----------------------------
Al Stone
Linux & Open Source Lab
Hewlett-Packard Company
E-mail: ahs3@fc.hp.com
----------------------------

Follow-Ups:
- Re: IA64 inline division question
  - From: Robert Dewar

References:
- IA64 inline division question
  - From: Steve Ellcey
- Re: IA64 inline division question
  - From: Vladimir Makarov
- Re: IA64 inline division question
  - From: Gerald Pfeifer

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