Marc Glisse <[email protected]> writes: > On Mon, 10 Feb 2025, Niels Möller wrote: > >> diff -r 1a2ad0e32507 configure.ac >> --- a/configure.ac Mon Feb 03 17:52:54 2025 +0100 >> +++ b/configure.ac Mon Feb 10 16:21:35 2025 +0100 >> @@ -3843,7 +3843,9 @@ yes >> X86_PATTERN | X86_64_PATTERN) >> GMP_ASM_ALIGN_FILL_0x90 >> if test "$x86_have_mulx" = yes; then >> - GMP_ASM_X86_MULX >> + if test "$enable_fat" = no; then >> + GMP_ASM_X86_MULX >> + fi >> fi >> GMP_ASM_COFF_TYPE >> case $ABI in > > I don't like it, GMP_ASM_X86_MULX is about the assembler supporting > the mulx instruction, not about the host processor being able to > execute it.
That's what the docs say, but as far as I see, it is used *only* for controlling the inline asm in longlong.h. Which is a bit puzzling: it would make sense if it also controls if mpn/x86_64/mulx is added to the asm path, but I don't see how that happens? I think it would make thigs a bit clearer to take out AC_DEFINE(X86_ASM_MULX, ...) from GMP_ASM_X86_MULX, and instead let the IF-YES path in configure.ac arrange so that the right things happen, for both fat and non-fat builds. Regards, /Niels -- Niels Möller. PGP key CB4962D070D77D7FCB8BA36271D8F1FF368C6677. Internet email is subject to wholesale government surveillance. _______________________________________________ gmp-bugs mailing list [email protected] https://gmplib.org/mailman/listinfo/gmp-bugs
