Hello!
> I've added avx512f support to __builtin_cpu_supports.
> I'm not sure about bw+vl, i think for compound values like
> avx512bd+dq+vl, arch is better. Also for such cases prority is unclear,
> what should we choose bw+vl or e. g. avx512f+er?
> I've left MPX bits in cpuid.h, in case we will
> >> I think using cpuid for that is just fine. __builtin_cpu_supports
> >> is for ISA additions users might actually want to version code for,
> >> MPX stuff, as the instructions are nops without hw support, are not
> >> something one would multi-version a function for.
> >> If anything, AVX512F
2014-11-21 20:45 GMT+03:00 Jeff Law :
> On 11/20/14 09:40, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 07:36:03PM +0300, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> MPX runtime checks some feature bits in order to check MPX is fully
>>> supported. Runtime does it by cpuid calls but there is a
On 11/20/14 09:40, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 07:36:03PM +0300, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
Hi,
MPX runtime checks some feature bits in order to check MPX is fully
supported. Runtime does it by cpuid calls but there is a
__builtin_cpu_supports which may be used for that. Unfortunat
On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 07:36:03PM +0300, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
> Hi,
>
> MPX runtime checks some feature bits in order to check MPX is fully
> supported. Runtime does it by cpuid calls but there is a
> __builtin_cpu_supports which may be used for that. Unfortunately
> currently it doesn't suppor
Hi,
MPX runtime checks some feature bits in order to check MPX is fully supported.
Runtime does it by cpuid calls but there is a __builtin_cpu_supports which may
be used for that. Unfortunately currently it doesn't support required bits.
Will it be OK to add them for trunk?
Thanks,
Ilya
--
