From: Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@gmail.com>
To: Sebastian Pop <sebpop@gmail.com>
Cc: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>,
dwarak.rajagopal@amd.com,
Harsha Jagasia <harsha.jagasia@amd.com>,
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: PATCH: Add LWP support for upcoming AMD Orochi processor.
Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2009 17:21:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4AF309A4.7060102@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <cb9d34b20911050858x7d49ec31n1f4641a6b7c43747@mail.gmail.com>
On 11/05/2009 05:58 PM, Sebastian Pop wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 5, 2009 at 10:21, Jakub Jelinek<jakub@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> As the following patch proves, lwpintrin.h and the whole lwp support is
>> quite severely broken.
>>
>>
> Should we revert the LWP patch and fix the issues that you raised,
> or should we submit patches on top of the current trunk?
>
Intrinsics should at least pass the sse-X tests that were mentioned in
this thread many times. These tests ensure, that all intrinsics can be
used together and won't interfere with each other or won't break with
various compile time options.
BTW: I don't think that LWP patch was approved by any x86 maintainer.
Uros.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-11-05 17:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-10-09 1:13 Harsha Jagasia
2009-10-09 10:07 ` Jakub Jelinek
2009-10-22 21:07 ` rajagopal, dwarak
2009-11-05 9:32 ` Jakub Jelinek
2009-11-05 16:21 ` Jakub Jelinek
2009-11-05 16:58 ` Sebastian Pop
2009-11-05 17:03 ` Richard Guenther
2009-11-05 17:21 ` Uros Bizjak [this message]
2009-11-06 10:15 ` Jakub Jelinek
2009-12-10 19:58 ` Sebastian Pop
2009-12-10 21:01 ` Jakub Jelinek
2009-12-10 21:04 ` Sebastian Pop
2009-12-10 21:52 ` Jakub Jelinek
2009-12-11 14:51 ` Jakub Jelinek
2009-12-11 16:54 ` Richard Henderson
2009-12-11 21:00 ` Sebastian Pop
2009-12-11 21:43 ` Jakub Jelinek
2009-12-11 22:27 ` Sebastian Pop
2009-12-12 9:27 ` Sebastian Pop
2009-12-14 16:35 ` Richard Henderson
2009-12-14 19:15 ` H.J. Lu
2009-12-14 19:21 ` Jakub Jelinek
2009-12-14 19:38 ` Richard Henderson
2009-12-14 20:15 ` Jakub Jelinek
2009-12-14 20:14 ` Uros Bizjak
2009-12-14 20:38 ` Jakub Jelinek
2009-12-14 20:52 ` Uros Bizjak
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2009-10-09 2:12 Ross Ridge
2009-10-01 7:51 Uros Bizjak
2009-10-01 10:09 ` Jan Hubicka
2009-10-01 4:06 Harsha Jagasia
2009-10-01 6:30 ` Jakub Jelinek
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=4AF309A4.7060102@gmail.com \
--to=ubizjak@gmail.com \
--cc=dwarak.rajagopal@amd.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=harsha.jagasia@amd.com \
--cc=jakub@redhat.com \
--cc=sebpop@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).