On Mar 14, 7:03 pm, Jason Moxham <ja...@njkfrudils.plus.com> wrote:
> On Saturday 14 March 2009 18:35:32 Bill Hart wrote:
>
> > OK, found the problem. Nocona now builds with core2 code. Can you
> > autoconf this and commit.
>
> I can install my old autotools on another machine, in a few hours.
> The new autotools require ylwrap , which I added with
> automake --add-missing
> ylwrap is used for parralel makes (which I certainly do)
> It's put it as a symbolic link though , I could copy the file itself
>
> commited anyway
>
>
>
> > So now we need to exclude those broken models after all. :-)
>
> > No need for a full round of testing. We only need to check that
> > configure still works on all the machines we've tested for and just
> > randomly test a few full builds.
>
> > Bill.
>
> > 2009/3/14 Jason Moxham <ja...@njkfrudils.plus.com>:
> > > On Saturday 14 March 2009 18:13:00 Bill Hart wrote:
> > >> OK, but I'm still unclear why it doesn't pick up the files in the
> > >> core2 directory. That is what it should do based on the code that is
> > >> there. This means noconas are giving a generic C build, which I am
> > >> sure Gonzalo would have complained about by now if it was the case,
> > >> because he has a nocona.
>
> > > Perhaps he uses fat build? , which would think its a core2
>
> > > There some references missing in configure.in , and a shed load of
> > > inconsistencies . I can fix but it means another round of testing
>
> > >> Bill.
>
> > >> 2009/3/14 Jason Moxham <ja...@njkfrudils.plus.com>:
> > >> > On Saturday 14 March 2009 18:07:59 Bill Hart wrote:
> > >> >> I get:
>
> > >> >> wbh...@sage:~/mpir-test$ ./configure --build=nocona-unknown-gnu-linux
> > >> >> checking build system type... Invalid configuration
> > >> >> `nocona-unknown-gnu-linux': machine `nocona-unknown-gnu' not
> > >> >> recognized
> > >> >> configure: error: /bin/bash ./config.sub nocona-unknown-gnu-linux
> > >> >> failed
>
> > >> >> I think config.sub is broken.
>
> > >> > whoops linux-gnu not gnu-linux
>
> > >> >> Bill.
>
> > >> >> 2009/3/14 Jason Moxham <ja...@njkfrudils.plus.com>:
> > >> >> > On Saturday 14 March 2009 17:59:00 Bill Hart wrote:
> > >> >> >> Are you sure about that:
>
> > >> >> >> case $host in
> > >> >> >> x86_64-*-* | i786-*-*)
> > >> >> >> path_64="x86_64/amd64 x86_64" ;;
> > >> >> >> k10-*-*)
> > >> >> >> path_64="x86_64/amd64/k10 x86_64/amd64 x86_64" ;;
> > >> >> >> nocona-*-* | core2-*-*)
> > >> >> >> <<-------------------------------------
> > >> >> >> path_64="x86_64/core2 x86_64" ;;
> > >> >> >> <<-------------------------------------
> > >> >> >> esac
>
> > >> >> >> Seems to use the core2 code.
>
> > >> >> > try with ./configure --build=nocona-unknown-gmu-linux and you get C
> > >> >> > and done on a real Pentium D as well
>
> > >> >> >> Bill.
>
> > >> >> >> 2009/3/14 Jason Moxham <ja...@njkfrudils.plus.com>:
> > >> >> >> > On Saturday 14 March 2009 17:41:58 Jason Moxham wrote:
> > >> >> >> >> Early Intel CPUs with Intel 64 lacked LAHF and SAHF
> > >> >> >> >> instructions available in AMD64 until introduction of Pentium 4
> > >> >> >> >> G1 step in December 2005. LAHF and SAHF are load and store
> > >> >> >> >> instructions, respectively, for certain status flags. These
> > >> >> >> >> instructions are used for virtualization and floating-point
> > >> >> >> >> condition handling.
>
> > >> >> >> >> I'll find out model numbers soon
>
> > >> >> >> > No need for MPIR-1.0.0 , all 64bit Pentium's default to nonoca
> > >> >> >> > which leads to a generic C build.
>
> > >> >> >> >> On Saturday 14 March 2009 17:20:25 Gonzalo Tornaria wrote:
> > >> >> >> >> > On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 1:45 PM, Jason Moxham
> > >> >> >> >> > <ja...@njkfrudils.plus.com>
>
> > >> >> >> >> wrote:
> > >> >> >> >> > > I pretty sure all core2 cpus have lahf,sahf , it's just
> > >> >> >> >> > > some Pentium D dont have it . You can test the lahf_lm
> > >> >> >> >> > > feature bit in cpuid to see if it's got it
>
> > >> >> >> >> > Tested in:
>
> > >> >> >> >> > My laptop: model 6 / family 15 (core 2 duo T5300).
> > >> >> >> >> > My desktop is family 15 / model 6 (pentium D 930).
>
> > >> >> >> >> > The "lahf_lm" feature is present in both according to
> > >> >> >> >> > /proc/cpuinfo.
>
> > >> >> >> >> > Note that the laptop is "low end" core 2 (in the sense it has
> > >> >> >> >> > no VT extensions). The pentium D is "high end" (in the sense
> > >> >> >> >> > it has VT extensions --- low end would be pentium D 8xx).
> > >> >> >> >> > Maybe that makes a difference?
>
> > >> >> >> >> > OTOH, the kvm 64 bit virtual cpu (kvm 72) doesn't seem to
> > >> >> >> >> > know about the "lahf_lm" (meaning, it won't report it in
> > >> >> >> >> > cpuid, even if the host processor has it. I assume the
> > >> >> >> >> > instructions would work anyway.)
>
> > >> >> >> >> > Gonzalo- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
I have just tested my GMP assembler code (based on Pierrick Gaudry's
code) for mpn_add_n and mpn_sub_n in MPIR on Core2 and it achieves the
same speed as the current code
So I can solve this on Windows without difficulty by simply using this
code.
It is very mature code so I don't see any problem in using it (I will
obviously test it).
Brian
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"mpir-devel" group.
To post to this group, send email to mpir-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
mpir-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/mpir-devel?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
