On Sat, Dec 27, 2014 at 8:18 AM, Mike Stump wrote:
> On Dec 26, 2014, at 7:57 AM, "H.J. Lu" wrote:
>> On Thu, Dec 25, 2014 at 9:07 PM, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
>>> On Thursday 2014-12-18 11:35, H.J. Lu wrote:
Updated.
>>>
>>> "the RAX register" (i.e., add "the"), and I suggest to make
>>> this
On Dec 26, 2014, at 7:57 AM, "H.J. Lu" wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 25, 2014 at 9:07 PM, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
>> On Thursday 2014-12-18 11:35, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>> Updated.
>>
>> "the RAX register" (i.e., add "the"), and I suggest to make
>> this a sentence, similar to my previous mail for the other
>> u
On Thu, Dec 25, 2014 at 9:07 PM, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> On Thursday 2014-12-18 11:35, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> Updated.
>
> "the RAX register" (i.e., add "the"), and I suggest to make
> this a sentence, similar to my previous mail for the other
> update.
>
> This is fine with these changes.
Done.
> Th
On Thursday 2014-12-18 11:35, H.J. Lu wrote:
> Updated.
"the RAX register" (i.e., add "the"), and I suggest to make
this a sentence, similar to my previous mail for the other
update.
This is fine with these changes.
Thank you -- and that's a nice hack (in the positive sense)!
Gerald
On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 11:22 AM, Mike Stump wrote:
> On Dec 18, 2014, at 9:43 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> + arguments passed in vector registers. This can be used to
>> + optimize Linux kernel.
>
> English, to optimize _the_ Linux kernel?
Updated.
--
H.J.
---
Index: gcc-5/changes.html
On Dec 18, 2014, at 9:43 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> + arguments passed in vector registers. This can be used to
> + optimize Linux kernel.
English, to optimize _the_ Linux kernel?
On 12/18/2014 10:37 AM, Rasmus Villemoes wrote:
>
> Minor thing: If it's not too late, I'd appreciate a 'Suggested-by' or
> similar mention in the kernel change log.
>
I think we can get that.
-hpa
On Thu, Dec 18 2014, "H. Peter Anvin" wrote:
> On 12/18/2014 09:43 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>
>> Peter, please feel free to use my kernel patch or create a different
>> one.
>>
>
> Great, thanks!
>
Thanks for accepting this idea, and especially to H.J. for already
having done all the work.
Minor t
On 12/18/2014 09:43 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>
> Peter, please feel free to use my kernel patch or create a different
> one.
>
Great, thanks!
-hpa
On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 6:08 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> On 12/18/2014 06:12 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>
> # temporary until string.h is fixed
> KBUILD_CFLAGS += -ffreestanding
>
> Yes, it looks to me that new option is the w
On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 6:08 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 12/18/2014 06:12 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
# temporary until string.h is fixed
KBUILD_CFLAGS += -ffreestanding
Yes, it looks to me that new option is the way to go.
>>>
>>> Is this an OK?
>>
>> In principle, I'm OK w
On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 9:08 AM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 12/18/2014 06:12 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
# temporary until string.h is fixed
KBUILD_CFLAGS += -ffreestanding
Yes, it looks to me that new option is the way to go.
>>>
>>> Is this an OK?
>>
>> In principle, I'm OK w
On 12/18/2014 06:12 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>>>
>>> # temporary until string.h is fixed
>>> KBUILD_CFLAGS += -ffreestanding
>>>
>>> Yes, it looks to me that new option is the way to go.
>>
>> Is this an OK?
>
> In principle, I'm OK with the patch approach, but let's wait for
> eventual comments fro
On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 3:09 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> The Linux kernel never passes floating point arguments around, vararg
> functions or not. Hence no vector registers are ever used when calling a
> vararg function. But gcc still dutifully emits an "xor %eax,%eax" before
> each and
On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 6:03 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 2:49 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>
The Linux kernel never passes floating point arguments around, vararg
functions or not. Hence no vector registers are ever used when calling a
vararg function. But gcc still
On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 2:49 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>>> The Linux kernel never passes floating point arguments around, vararg
>>> functions or not. Hence no vector registers are ever used when calling a
>>> vararg function. But gcc still dutifully emits an "xor %eax,%eax" before
>>> each and eve
On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 5:51 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 02:24:06PM +0100, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>> > It removed 14309 redundant "xor %eax,%eax" instructions and saved about
>> > 27KB. I am currently running the new kernel without any problem. OK
>> > for trunk?
>>
>> How abo
On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 02:24:06PM +0100, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> > It removed 14309 redundant "xor %eax,%eax" instructions and saved about
> > 27KB. I am currently running the new kernel without any problem. OK
> > for trunk?
>
> How about skipping RAX setup unconditionally for !TARGET_SSE? Please
On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 2:24 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 2:11 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> The Linux kernel never passes floating point arguments around, vararg
>> functions or not. Hence no vector registers are ever used when calling a
>> vararg function. But gcc still dutifully e
On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 2:11 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> The Linux kernel never passes floating point arguments around, vararg
> functions or not. Hence no vector registers are ever used when calling a
> vararg function. But gcc still dutifully emits an "xor %eax,%eax" before
> each and every call of a
20 matches
Mail list logo
