On Wed, Dec 25, 2013 at 2:32 PM, Uros Bizjak ubiz...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Dec 25, 2013 at 10:31 PM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
cpu_names in i386.c is only used by ix86_function_specific_print
which
accesses it with enum processor_type index. But cpu_names is
defined as
On Wed, Dec 25, 2013 at 12:49 PM, Uros Bizjak ubiz...@gmail.com wrote:
TARGET_CPU_DEFAULT is left over for 32-bit target before --with-arch=
and --with-cpu= were added. Today, -mtune=xxx -march=xxx are
always passed to cc1 by GCC driver. If cc1 is run by hand and
-mtune=xxx -march=xxx aren't
On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 7:03 PM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
cpu_names in i386.c is only used by ix86_function_specific_print which
accesses it with enum processor_type index. But cpu_names is defined as
array with enum target_cpu_default index. This patch adds processor
names to
On Wed, Dec 25, 2013 at 12:49 PM, Uros Bizjak ubiz...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 7:03 PM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
cpu_names in i386.c is only used by ix86_function_specific_print which
accesses it with enum processor_type index. But cpu_names is defined as
array with
On Wed, Dec 25, 2013 at 10:02 PM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Dec 25, 2013 at 12:49 PM, Uros Bizjak ubiz...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 7:03 PM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
cpu_names in i386.c is only used by ix86_function_specific_print which
accesses it
On Wed, Dec 25, 2013 at 10:03:45PM +0100, Uros Bizjak wrote:
On Wed, Dec 25, 2013 at 10:02 PM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Dec 25, 2013 at 12:49 PM, Uros Bizjak ubiz...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 7:03 PM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
cpu_names in i386.c
On Wed, Dec 25, 2013 at 10:31 PM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
cpu_names in i386.c is only used by ix86_function_specific_print
which
accesses it with enum processor_type index. But cpu_names is
defined as
array with enum target_cpu_default index. This patch adds processor
Hi,
cpu_names in i386.c is only used by ix86_function_specific_print which
accesses it with enum processor_type index. But cpu_names is defined as
array with enum target_cpu_default index. This patch adds processor
names to processor_target_table and uses processor_target_table instead
of
On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 2:08 PM, H.J. Lu hongjiu...@intel.com wrote:
cpu_names in i386.c is only used by ix86_function_specific_print which
accesses it with enum processor_type index. But cpu_names is defined as
array with enum target_cpu_default index. This patch adds processor
names to
On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 2:08 PM, H.J. Lu hongjiu...@intel.com wrote:
cpu_names in i386.c is only used by ix86_function_specific_print which
accesses it with enum processor_type index. But cpu_names is defined as
array with enum target_cpu_default index. This patch adds processor
names to
On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 6:12 AM, Uros Bizjak ubiz...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 2:08 PM, H.J. Lu hongjiu...@intel.com wrote:
cpu_names in i386.c is only used by ix86_function_specific_print which
accesses it with enum processor_type index. But cpu_names is defined as
array with
On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 3:23 PM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 6:12 AM, Uros Bizjak ubiz...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 2:08 PM, H.J. Lu hongjiu...@intel.com wrote:
cpu_names in i386.c is only used by ix86_function_specific_print which
accesses it
On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 6:50 AM, Uros Bizjak ubiz...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 3:23 PM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 6:12 AM, Uros Bizjak ubiz...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 2:08 PM, H.J. Lu hongjiu...@intel.com wrote:
cpu_names in
On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 6:55 AM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 6:50 AM, Uros Bizjak ubiz...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 3:23 PM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 6:12 AM, Uros Bizjak ubiz...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Dec 24,
14 matches
Mail list logo
