On Tue, Apr 11, 2006 at 12:05:41PM -0400, Donsbach, Jeff wrote: > Aurelien Jarno wrote: > > This is only ev67. This is the mentioned architecture in the bug > report. > > I know almost nothing about alpha CPUs, but it seems EV67 is the CPU > for which the gain would > > be significant. > > Maybe. Maybe not. What is the nature of the changes you made? What EV67 > specific features did you use and where? Did you just recompile with > "-march=ev67"?
The libraries are built with -march=ev67 -mtune=ev67, but also the target is alphaev67-linux-gnu, which means that optimized assembly code is used for some functions (the one listed in my first mail). > If you are using native byte/word instructions in your changes, those > are supported back into the EV56 family. I don't know exactly. But you can have a look to the corresponding assembly codes in the glibc sources, in sysdeps/alpha/alphaev67/ > What you might want to do is test for the CPU's capabilities (i.e. bwx > support, mvi support, cix support) individually rather than a blanket > "if ev67 (do a) else (do b)" > Well this is not possible, the kernel only returns the CPU class, from the following list: ev4, ev5, ev56, pca56, ev6, ev67. Bye, Aurelien -- .''`. Aurelien Jarno | GPG: 1024D/F1BCDB73 : :' : Debian developer | Electrical Engineer `. `' [EMAIL PROTECTED] | [EMAIL PROTECTED] `- people.debian.org/~aurel32 | www.aurel32.net -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
