[PATCH] x86: Mark cvtpi2ps and cvtpi2pd as MMX
H.J. Lu
hjl.tools@gmail.com
Wed Feb 19 14:46:00 GMT 2020
More information about the Binutils mailing list
Wed Feb 19 14:46:00 GMT 2020
- Previous message (by thread): [PATCH] x86: Mark cvtpi2ps and cvtpi2pd as MMX
- Next message (by thread): [PATCH] x86: Mark cvtpi2ps and cvtpi2pd as MMX
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 6:36 AM Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> wrote: > > On 19.02.2020 15:23, H.J. Lu wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 6:19 AM Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> wrote: > >> On 19.02.2020 15:09, H.J. Lu wrote: > >>> On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 5:53 AM Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> wrote: > >>>> As per your suggested doc patch "pure SSE" means "not touching MMX > >>>> registers or state". This is the case for CVTPI2PD. > >>> > >>> I will exclude cvtpi2ps and cvtpi2pd explicitly. > >> > >> Okay, this would clarify what "pure SSE" means. My next objection > >> then is to make a connection between "pure SSE" and the feature > >> used property. There, as made pretty clear by my earlier inquiry > >> about the intentions of this feature tracking, things should be > >> really tied to hardware behavior. I.e. "not touching MMX registers > >> or state" ==> MMX feature not recorded as being used. No > >> exceptions for any insns. > > > > Intention is to treat cvtpi2ps and cvtpi2pd as MMX. > > Well, I understand you want to special case these. But the model > behind the feature recording shouldn't require any (such) special > cases. To possible consumers of this information it doesn't matter > what exact insns are being used. Instead, affected machine state > is what counts. Hence the individual flags should be tied to the > machine state individual insns consume or touch, and at that point > no special cases like the ones you suggest are going to be needed > (special casing may still be needed when possibly the > consumed/touched machine state can't be inferred from other > information available, most notably the insn template and its > actual operands). Intention is to mark any instructions whose form include MMX register or state as MMX. -- H.J.
- Previous message (by thread): [PATCH] x86: Mark cvtpi2ps and cvtpi2pd as MMX
- Next message (by thread): [PATCH] x86: Mark cvtpi2ps and cvtpi2pd as MMX
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Binutils mailing list