Hi H.J., On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 5:07 PM, H.J. Lu <hjl.to...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 11:28 AM, Sriraman Tallam <tmsri...@google.com> wrote: >> Hi H.J, >> >> Attaching new patch with 2 test cases, mv2.C checks ISAs only and >> mv1.C checks ISAs and arches mixed. Right now, checking only arches is >> not needed as they are mutually exclusive, any order should be fine. >> >> Patch also available for review here: http://codereview.appspot.com/5752064 > > Sorry for the delay. It looks OK except for the function order in tescases. > I think you should rearrange them so that they are not in the same order > as the priority.
I am not sure I understand. The function order is mixed up in the declarations, I have explicitly commented about this. I only do the checking in order which I must, right? Thanks, -Sri. > > Thanks. > > H.J. >> Thanks, >> -Sri. >> >> On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 6:37 AM, H.J. Lu <hjl.to...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 7:04 PM, Sriraman Tallam <tmsri...@google.com> >>> wrote: >>>> Hi H.J., >>>> >>>> I have updated the patch to improve the dispatching method like we >>>> discussed. Each feature gets a priority now, and the dispatching is >>>> done in priority order. Please see i386.c for the changes. >>>> >>>> Patch also available for review here: >>>> http://codereview.appspot.com/5752064 >>>> >>> >>> I think you need 3 tests: >>> >>> 1. Only with ISA. >>> 2. Only with arch >>> 3. Mixed with ISA and arch >>> >>> since test mixed ISA and arch may hide issues with ISA only or arch only. >>> >>> --
