On Sun, Nov 10, 2002 at 08:42:30PM +0100, Arpi wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > > not too long ago I read on this list that you have to be extra careful
> > > about using floating point in the kernel. Is the same true for MMX? If
> > > so, would it be dangerous to compile a kernel module with -march=athlon?
> >
On Sun, 10 Nov 2002 20:42:30 +0100
Arpi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
[snip]
> Not. gcc (3.1+) will use MMX for integer, SSE for float code, even with
> normal instructions, if both
> - code optimization enabled (so it will recognize normal array operations
> (example: for(i=0;i<15;i++) y[
On Sun, 10 Nov 2002 11:26:25 -0800 (PST)
Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Sun, 10 Nov 2002, Felix Kühling wrote:
> >
> > not too long ago I read on this list that you have to be extra careful
> > about using floating point in the kernel. Is the same true for MMX? If
> > so, would
Hi,
> > not too long ago I read on this list that you have to be extra careful
> > about using floating point in the kernel. Is the same true for MMX? If
> > so, would it be dangerous to compile a kernel module with -march=athlon?
> > AFAIK gcc-3.2 generates MMX instructions if the target CPU supp
On Sun, 10 Nov 2002, Felix Kühling wrote:
>
> not too long ago I read on this list that you have to be extra careful
> about using floating point in the kernel. Is the same true for MMX? If
> so, would it be dangerous to compile a kernel module with -march=athlon?
> AFAIK gcc-3.2 generates MMX in
Hi all,
not too long ago I read on this list that you have to be extra careful
about using floating point in the kernel. Is the same true for MMX? If
so, would it be dangerous to compile a kernel module with -march=athlon?
AFAIK gcc-3.2 generates MMX instructions if the target CPU supports
them.
