Jan Kiszka wrote:
> Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
>>>So, Ok, I will try to do something for x86 (either reduce the numbers of
>>>registers used by the C code, or reduce the assembly to the bare
>>>minimum). But, please, pick my generic implementation of llmulshft, it
>>>was carefully written.
>>Yes, it is the better choice for 32 bit archs (my previous tests didn't
>>reflect the usage in Xenomai truely, redoing them made my generic
>>version fall behind yours). Will include it.
> Done, see -v6. Then I added that two-liner for x86_64 rthal_llmulshft,
> fixed the BITS_PER_LONG bug, and enabled generic-based support for ARM
> (testing welcome!).
> At this chance: My series now also includes rthal_llimd for x86_64,
> another two-liner.

v6 is not in the download area.

                                                 Gilles Chanteperdrix

Xenomai-core mailing list

Reply via email to