From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4927 invoked by alias); 27 Mar 2010 15:15:11 -0000 Received: (qmail 4869 invoked by uid 22791); 27 Mar 2010 15:15:09 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SARE_MSGID_LONG40 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail-vw0-f41.google.com (HELO mail-vw0-f41.google.com) (209.85.212.41) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sat, 27 Mar 2010 15:15:04 +0000 Received: by vws20 with SMTP id 20so5047595vws.0 for ; Sat, 27 Mar 2010 08:15:03 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.220.85.193 with HTTP; Sat, 27 Mar 2010 08:15:02 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <201003271508.o2RF80I7030511@glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl> References: <20100304180219.GA10826@intel.com> <20100304180408.GA10869@intel.com> <20100304180748.GC10869@intel.com> <20100304180901.GD10869@intel.com> <20100306222212.GF21133@intel.com> <201003271508.o2RF80I7030511@glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl> Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2010 15:15:00 -0000 Received: by 10.220.123.95 with SMTP id o31mr1632789vcr.23.1269702902808; Sat, 27 Mar 2010 08:15:02 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <6dc9ffc81003270815k316b4084jef5722671fedb561@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: PATCH: 5/6 [2nd try]: Add AVX support (i387 changes) From: "H.J. Lu" To: Mark Kettenis Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2010-03/txt/msg00926.txt.bz2 On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 8:08 AM, Mark Kettenis wr= ote: >> Date: Sat, 6 Mar 2010 14:22:12 -0800 >> From: "H.J. Lu" >> >> Hi, >> >> Here are i387 changes to support AVX. =A0OK to install? > > I can't help thinking that the i387_supply_xsave/i387_collect_xsave > functions can be written in a simpler way, but I guess for now this is > acceptable. =A0Hope you don't mind if a I rewrite that logic at some > point though. > That is fine with me as long as the new code is extensible and follows processor architecture specification. BTW, the version in gdbserver/i387-fp.c is much simpler. Thanks. --=20 H.J.