public inbox for binutils@sourceware.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>
To: Quentin Neill <quentin.neill.gnu@gmail.com>
Cc: binutils@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] add bdver2 processor.
Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 17:56:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <BANLkTimwWnxZu+NCoGaUL2Z53ptEsK-S2g@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTin=2GZV86x7xSKQGFyQyryD2ED=tw@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 9:51 AM, Quentin Neill
<quentin.neill.gnu@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 7:40 AM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 9:09 PM, Quentin Neill
>> <quentin.neill.gnu@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 11:45 AM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 9:16 AM, Quentin Neill
>>>> <quentin.neill.gnu@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> This patch adds the bdver2 processor flag.  It passes make check on x86-64.
>>>>>
>>>>> Okay to commit?
>>>>> --
>>>>> Quentin
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> gas/
>>>>>        * config/tc-i386.c (cpu_arch): Add bdver2.
>>>>>        (i386_align_code): Add PROCESSOR_BDVER2 cases.
>>>>>        * config/tc-i386.h (processor_type): Add PROCESSOR_BDVER2.
>>>>>        * doc/c-i386.texi: Add bdver2.
>>>>>
>>>>> opcodes/
>>>>>        * i386-gen.c (cpu_flag_init): Add new CPU_BDVER2_FLAGS.
>>>>>        * i386-init.h: Regenerated.
>>>>>
>>>>> gas/testsuite/
>>>>>        * gas/i386/i386.exp: Add new bdver2 test cases.
>>>>>        * gas/i386/nops-1-bdver2.d: New.
>>>>>        * gas/i386/x86-64-nops-1-bdver2.d: New.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Do you nreally nned PROCESSOR_BDVER2? Can you use PROCESSOR_BDVER1? instead?
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> H.J.
>>>>
>>>
>>> BDVER2 adds BMI and TBM.
>>
>> That is controlled by CPU_BDVER2_FLAGS.
>>
>
> [ Sorry for the delay,  I was out for a couple of days.  Re-adding
> binutils@sourceware.org (I meant to copy on my 2nd reply). ]
>
> So without PROCESSOR_BDVER2, that means no -march=bdver2 flag support,
> but what else?
>

Can you replace PROCESSOR_BDVER2 with  PROCESSOR_BDVER1
to see if it makes a difference?

-- 
H.J.

  reply	other threads:[~2011-05-10 17:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-05-04 16:16 Quentin Neill
2011-05-04 16:45 ` H.J. Lu
     [not found]   ` <BANLkTinukDoLD-yJ6SyfDbAjLO=NvHiN2w@mail.gmail.com>
     [not found]     ` <BANLkTinNnuhwjwp_0+FubD4=wzSixt6XvA@mail.gmail.com>
2011-05-10 16:52       ` Quentin Neill
2011-05-10 17:56         ` H.J. Lu [this message]
2011-05-10 18:28           ` Quentin Neill
2011-05-10 19:11             ` H.J. Lu
2011-05-10 20:12               ` Quentin Neill
2011-05-10 21:15                 ` H.J. Lu
2011-05-11  6:40               ` Jan Beulich
2011-05-11 14:24                 ` Quentin Neill
2011-05-12  2:17                   ` Quentin Neill
2011-05-12  2:34                     ` H.J. Lu

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=BANLkTimwWnxZu+NCoGaUL2Z53ptEsK-S2g@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=hjl.tools@gmail.com \
    --cc=binutils@sourceware.org \
    --cc=quentin.neill.gnu@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).