From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18903 invoked by alias); 10 May 2011 18:28:49 -0000 Received: (qmail 18893 invoked by uid 22791); 10 May 2011 18:28:48 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RFC_ABUSE_POST,TW_BD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail-pv0-f169.google.com (HELO mail-pv0-f169.google.com) (74.125.83.169) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 10 May 2011 18:28:34 +0000 Received: by pvc12 with SMTP id 12so4396620pvc.0 for ; Tue, 10 May 2011 11:28:33 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.68.35.165 with SMTP id i5mr11755530pbj.449.1305052113700; Tue, 10 May 2011 11:28:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.68.46.67 with HTTP; Tue, 10 May 2011 11:28:33 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 18:28:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] add bdver2 processor. From: Quentin Neill To: "H.J. Lu" , binutils@sourceware.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact binutils-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: binutils-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2011-05/txt/msg00122.txt.bz2 On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 12:55 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: > On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 9:51 AM, Quentin Neill > wrote: >> On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 7:40 AM, H.J. Lu wrote: >>> On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 9:09 PM, Quentin Neill >>> wrote: >>>> On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 11:45 AM, H.J. Lu wrote: >>>>> On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 9:16 AM, Quentin Neill >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> This patch adds the bdver2 processor flag. =A0It passes make check o= n x86-64. >>>>>> >>>>>> Okay to commit? >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Quentin >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> gas/ >>>>>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0* config/tc-i386.c (cpu_arch): Add bdver2. >>>>>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0(i386_align_code): Add PROCESSOR_BDVER2 cases. >>>>>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0* config/tc-i386.h (processor_type): Add PROCESSOR_BD= VER2. >>>>>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0* doc/c-i386.texi: Add bdver2. >>>>>> >>>>>> opcodes/ >>>>>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0* i386-gen.c (cpu_flag_init): Add new CPU_BDVER2_FLAG= S. >>>>>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0* i386-init.h: Regenerated. >>>>>> >>>>>> gas/testsuite/ >>>>>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0* gas/i386/i386.exp: Add new bdver2 test cases. >>>>>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0* gas/i386/nops-1-bdver2.d: New. >>>>>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0* gas/i386/x86-64-nops-1-bdver2.d: New. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Do you nreally nned PROCESSOR_BDVER2? Can you use PROCESSOR_BDVER1? i= nstead? >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> H.J. >>>>> >>>> >>>> BDVER2 adds BMI and TBM. >>> >>> That is controlled by CPU_BDVER2_FLAGS. >>> >> >> [ Sorry for the delay, =A0I was out for a couple of days. =A0Re-adding >> binutils@sourceware.org (I meant to copy on my 2nd reply). ] >> >> So without PROCESSOR_BDVER2, that means no -march=3Dbdver2 flag support, >> but what else? >> > > Can you replace PROCESSOR_BDVER2 with =A0PROCESSOR_BDVER1 > to see if it makes a difference? > Now I understand, I was thinking you meant remove "bdver2" flag as well. Should I rename the PROCESSOR_BDVER1 variable to perhaps PROCESSOR_BDVER? --=20 Quentin