[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: hwcap supporting architectures?

On Tue, Jan 11, 2005 at 03:52:58PM +0900, GOTO Masanori wrote:

 > Note that MMX will be removed from the next glibc 2.3.4 upload.  It
 > will provide only SSE2 (and CMOV, debian-specific for only VIA C3
 > processor).

 Well, there's hand-crafted MMX code, so it's runtime checked.  I guess
 that would take care of it.  After following the advice in other
 replies, gcc is generating CMOVs, too.

 > If you want to keep adding mmx, we may need discussion about this
 > issue in future.

 I think MMX is ok.  I don't think gcc is generating MMX on its own.
 > But nowadays many processors can use SSE2, so I guess changing cmov
 > to SSE2 can fix the problem.

 The SSE2 code generated by gcc causes clipping errors, so I turned that
 option off.

 > >  My understanding is that this is also significant on sparc
 > >  (-mcpu=v9) and that this belongs in /usr/lib/v9.  Is this right?
 > Sparc defines HWCAP_SPARC_V9 and HWCAP_SPARC_ULTRA3.  So v9 is right.
 > See glibc sparc packages.


 Where would ultra3 libs go? /usr/lib/sparc/ultra3? (sorry about the
 naive question, but I had a hardtime finding this sort of

 > >  Mesa upstream uses -mcpu=ev5 -mieee on alpha.  Is that ok?  Where
 > >  does this belong into? /usr/lib/ev5?
 > IIRC, alpha does not define any hwcaps.

 Oh... I was looking at the atlas packages (I *think*), and it installed
 some libs in /usr/lib/ev5 (or something along those lines).  Is that
 manually handled by atlas or something like that?

 > >  It also uses -mcpu=603 on powerpc.  From my understanding this is
 > >  a lot hairier than other architectures since there's a whole load
 > >  more subarchitectures which are potentially incompatible with each
 > >  other.
 > Powerpc does not define any hwcaps, too.

 Thanks for the help!


Reply to: