On Fri, Mar 7, 2008 at 8:13 PM, TonyB <[email protected]> wrote:
> I just recently joined this mail list, as I'm wondering about extended > instruction support for these chips. I've tried looking at the archives on > SF.net, but the search keeps timing out. Could someone update me on the > current progress > I don't know specifically about the extended support for x618 but unless the extended instructions are measurably improving general code generation for non-x618 specific code, the compiler shouldn't know about them. Instead, they should be used from asm() constructs ( http://www.ibiblio.org/gferg/ldp/GCC-Inline-Assembly-HOWTO.html ). You can wrap the asm() snippets into #defines and function calls so that they look almost invisible, as if they were emitted by the code generator. GCC has a very nice facility for asm(), where the compiler generates and even optimizes data movements to register and memory locations required by the asm() instructions, without knowing their semantics.
