On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 12:11 AM, Jose Fonseca wrote:
>
>
> - Original Message -
>> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 8:57 PM, Roland Scheidegger
>> wrote:
>> > Am 23.07.2013 19:08, schrieb Andre Heider:
>> >> For AVX it's not sufficient to only rely on the cpuid flags. If the CPU
>> >> supports th
- Original Message -
> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 8:57 PM, Roland Scheidegger
> wrote:
> > Am 23.07.2013 19:08, schrieb Andre Heider:
> >> For AVX it's not sufficient to only rely on the cpuid flags. If the CPU
> >> supports these extensions, but the OS doesn't, issuing these insns will
> >
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 8:57 PM, Roland Scheidegger wrote:
> Am 23.07.2013 19:08, schrieb Andre Heider:
>> For AVX it's not sufficient to only rely on the cpuid flags. If the CPU
>> supports these extensions, but the OS doesn't, issuing these insns will
>> trigger an undefined opcode exception.
>>
Am 23.07.2013 19:08, schrieb Andre Heider:
> For AVX it's not sufficient to only rely on the cpuid flags. If the CPU
> supports these extensions, but the OS doesn't, issuing these insns will
> trigger an undefined opcode exception.
>
> In addition to the AVX cpuid bit we also need to:
> * test cpu
For AVX it's not sufficient to only rely on the cpuid flags. If the CPU
supports these extensions, but the OS doesn't, issuing these insns will
trigger an undefined opcode exception.
In addition to the AVX cpuid bit we also need to:
* test cpuid for OSXSAVE support
* XGETBV to check if the OS save
