[PATCH] x86: Mark cvtpi2ps and cvtpi2pd as MMX
Jan Beulich
jbeulich@suse.com
Wed Feb 19 14:58:00 GMT 2020
More information about the Binutils mailing list
Wed Feb 19 14:58:00 GMT 2020
- Previous message (by thread): [PATCH] x86: Mark cvtpi2ps and cvtpi2pd as MMX
- Next message (by thread): [PATCH] Merge upstream GCC changes for include/ and libiberty/ directories
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On 19.02.2020 15:46, H.J. Lu wrote: > 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. Exactly. And hence CVTPI2PD should not get such marking when having a memory operand. Jan
- Previous message (by thread): [PATCH] x86: Mark cvtpi2ps and cvtpi2pd as MMX
- Next message (by thread): [PATCH] Merge upstream GCC changes for include/ and libiberty/ directories
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Binutils mailing list