On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 2:34 PM, Jonathan Gray wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 09, 2015 at 01:39:30PM +0200, Oded Gabbay wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 1:09 PM, Emil Velikov
>> wrote:
>> > On 9 December 2015 at 05:37, Jonathan Gray wrote:
>> >> Change the __m128i variables to be volatile so gcc 4.9 won't
On Wed, Dec 09, 2015 at 01:39:30PM +0200, Oded Gabbay wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 1:09 PM, Emil Velikov wrote:
> > On 9 December 2015 at 05:37, Jonathan Gray wrote:
> >> Change the __m128i variables to be volatile so gcc 4.9 won't optimise
> >> all of them out with -O1 or greater. The _mm_se
On 9 December 2015 at 11:39, Oded Gabbay wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 1:09 PM, Emil Velikov wrote:
>> On 9 December 2015 at 05:37, Jonathan Gray wrote:
>>> Change the __m128i variables to be volatile so gcc 4.9 won't optimise
>>> all of them out with -O1 or greater. The _mm_set1_epi32/pinsrd
On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 1:09 PM, Emil Velikov wrote:
> On 9 December 2015 at 05:37, Jonathan Gray wrote:
>> Change the __m128i variables to be volatile so gcc 4.9 won't optimise
>> all of them out with -O1 or greater. The _mm_set1_epi32/pinsrd calls
>> still get optimised out but now there is at
