Ciao, Il Sab, 25 Gennaio 2014 7:15 pm, Torbjorn Granlund ha scritto: > operating system support. Now, we suppress use of (some) gcc > sse-related options which trigger bad behaviour (via the acinclude.m4 > GMP_GCC_PENTIUM4_SSE2) and in that context check of the OS handles XMM > (via GMP_OS_X86_XMM).
Should we suppress all of them when XMM is not supported? We should add -march=corei7~-mno-sse2 -march=atom~-mno-sse2 -march=bdver4~-mno-sse2 -march=bdver3~-mno-sse2 -march=bdver2~-mno-sse2 -march=bdver1~-mno-sse2 -march=btver2~-mno-sse2 -march=btver1~-mno-sse2 -march=amdfam10~-mno-sse2 ? > Limiting that check to that context does not properly suppress assembly > code in sse2 subdirs. Suppressing all that code would actually be > sub-optimal, since some of it might actually stick to MMX regs. Does this means move the three offending asm in an xmm subdir, then add: case "$path $fat_path" in *xmm*) GMP_OS_X86_XMM($cc $cflags $cppflags, , [GMP_STRIP_PATH(xmm)]) ;; esac ? > I discovered this problem when running tests on the long-obsolete > FreeBSD 4. Uhm, a comment in acinclude.m4 says: dnl - FreeBSD version 4 is the first supporting xmm. should we also change the condition there, from [freebsd[123] | freebsd[123].*]) to [freebsd[1234] | freebsd[1234].*]) ? The first sounds like a lot of work, the second and the third step might be worth doing, even for a long-obsolete OS. Regards, m -- http://bodrato.it/papers/ _______________________________________________ gmp-devel mailing list gmp-devel@gmplib.org https://gmplib.org/mailman/listinfo/gmp-devel