On Tue, 7 Jun 2011, Richard Henderson wrote: > On 06/06/2011 04:07 PM, malc wrote: > > Depends on how bswap_16 is defined. If it is __builtin_bswap16 > > then 4.5.0 and 4.6.0 generate byte reversed loads, and previous > > versions lack that builtin, so i don't think this generic code > > should go in. > > It would continue to be defined as-is, without direct reference > to the __builtin_bswap functions. But you're right that the > generic code would depend on the bswap optimization pass that > recognizes the mask/shift/or pattern and converts it to the > builtins internally. > > What if we kept the ppc ifdefs, but converted the rest to the > gcc generic code? >
No objections. -- mailto:av1...@comtv.ru
