On 11/14/19 5:21 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 11:35 AM Hongtao Liu <crazy...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Hi: >> As mentioned in https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-11/msg00832.html >>> So yes, it's poorly named. A preparatory patch to clean this up >>> (and maybe split it into TARGET_AVX256_SPLIT_REGS and TARGET_AVX128_OPTIMAL) >>> would be nice. >> >> Bootstrap and regression test for i386 backend is ok. >> Ok for trunk? > > It looks OK to me, please let x86 maintainers a day to comment, otherwise OK I think this fine to go in now. Uros largely leaves the AVX bits to others.
jeff
