On Mon, Aug 21, 2023 at 4:38 PM Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 21, 2023 at 04:28:20PM +0800, Hongtao Liu wrote: > > We have an undocumented option mavx10-max-512bit. > > How it is called internally is one thing, but it is weird to use > avx10 in an option name which would be meant for finding common subset > of -mavx512xxx and -mavx10.1-256. We can have an alias for the name, but internally use the same bit since they're doing the same thing. And the option is somewhat orthogonal to AVX512XXX/AVX10, it only care about vector/kmask size. > > Jakub >
-- BR, Hongtao
