This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH][libgcc-math] Vectorized intrinsics for x86_64
- From: Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin dot org>
- To: Steven Bosscher <stevenb dot gcc at gmail dot com>
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, "H. J. Lu" <hjl at lucon dot org>, Michael Matz <matz at suse dot de>, Richard Guenther <rguenther at suse dot de>, Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>
- Date: Sat, 08 Apr 2006 19:32:38 -0400
- Subject: Re: [PATCH][libgcc-math] Vectorized intrinsics for x86_64
- References: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0603281022000.3982@t148.fhfr.qr> <Pine.LNX.4.58.0604071530310.4311@wotan.suse.de> <20060407134720.GA19834@lucon.org> <200604082322.55343.steven@gcc.gnu.org>
On Sat, 2006-04-08 at 23:22 +0200, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> On Friday 07 April 2006 15:47, H. J. Lu wrote:
> > The code is specific to Opteron. Shouldn't it be neutral to Opteron
> > and Nocona?
>
> The assembly code was "contributed by AMD" (see the original posting
> in http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-03/msg01611.html). Shouldn't
> Intel first make sure that ICC works as well for Opteron as it does for
> Nocona before Intel asks from AMD to write Nocona-optimized code? :-P
>
Also, if Intel wants to code that works well for their processor, Intel
should contribute code that works well for their processor.