On 11/8/05, Paolo Carlini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Richard Guenther wrote: > > >Just to put some more thoughts on the table, I'm about to propose adding > >a __gcc_cpu_feature symbol to $suitable_place, similar to what Intel is > >doing with its __intel_cpu_indicator which is used in their runtime libraries > >to select different code paths based on processor capabilities. I'm not > >yet sure if and how to best expose this to the user, but internally this > >could > >be mapped 1:1 to what we have in the TARGET_* flags. > > > > > Richard, I think that irrespective of the current needs of v3, this > preprocessor builtin can be very useful for people wanting to flexibly > configure their projects to exploit the builtins when available. I would > like to see you proposing a finished patch. > > Are there objections?
I don't know. I still have to decide where to put the symbol and how/if to give users access to it officially. I.e. put it in crt?.o or libgcc? Have some builtin_test_cpu_feature()? Or just builtin_cpu_features() returning a pointer to the symbol? Of course not exposing it initially allows to correct all mistakes initially done. What would be interesting to know, is what architectures apart from ia32 will likely profit from this? Of course general dislike will help not wasting more time on doing it as well ;) Richard.
