On 04.07.2019 20:38, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 04/07/2019 15:54, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 04.07.2019 16:47, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>> On 01/07/2019 12:22, Jan Beulich wrote:
--- a/xen/tools/gen-cpuid.py
+++ b/xen/tools/gen-cpuid.py
@@ -268,7 +268,7 @@ def crunch_numbers(state):
On 04/07/2019 15:54, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 04.07.2019 16:47, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> On 01/07/2019 12:22, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> --- a/xen/tools/gen-cpuid.py
>>> +++ b/xen/tools/gen-cpuid.py
>>> @@ -268,7 +268,7 @@ def crunch_numbers(state):
>>># AVX512 extensions acting on vectors
On 04.07.2019 16:47, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 01/07/2019 12:22, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> --- a/xen/tools/gen-cpuid.py
>> +++ b/xen/tools/gen-cpuid.py
>> @@ -268,7 +268,7 @@ def crunch_numbers(state):
>># AVX512 extensions acting on vectors of bytes/words are made
>>#
On 01/07/2019 12:22, Jan Beulich wrote:
> --- a/xen/tools/gen-cpuid.py
> +++ b/xen/tools/gen-cpuid.py
> @@ -268,7 +268,7 @@ def crunch_numbers(state):
> # AVX512 extensions acting on vectors of bytes/words are made
> # dependents of AVX512BW (as to requiring wider than 16-bit
Plus the only other AVX512_BITALG one.
As in a few cases before, since the insns here and in particular their
memory access patterns follow the usual scheme, I didn't think it was
necessary to add a contrived test specifically for them, beyond the
Disp8 scaling one.
Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich
