Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+willy=40w.ods.org@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id <S315758AbSIIAmD>; Sun, 8 Sep 2002 20:42:03 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org
	id <S315762AbSIIAmD>; Sun, 8 Sep 2002 20:42:03 -0400
Received: from 212.68.254.82.brutele.be ([212.68.254.82]:42511 "EHLO debian")
	by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id <S315758AbSIIAmC>;
	Sun, 8 Sep 2002 20:42:02 -0400
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2002 02:46:45 +0200
From: Stephane Wirtel <stephane.wirtel@belgacom.net>
To: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.4/2.5] Athlon CFLAGS
Message-ID: <20020909004644.GA21949@debian>
References: <200209082128.11316.daniel.mehrmann@gmx.de> <20020909011833.B14358@suse.de> <200209090213.10063.daniel.mehrmann@gmx.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <200209090213.10063.daniel.mehrmann@gmx.de>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i
X-Operating-System: GNU/Linux
X-LUG: Linux Users Group Mons ( Linux-Mons )
X-URL: http://www.linux-mons.be
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 2379
Lines: 68


in your patch, you don't check the gcc version.
if i run with a gcc-2.95.3, you will be a compile error 


On Mon, Sep 09, 2002 at 02:13:10AM +0200, Daniel Mehrmann wrote:
> On Monday 09 September 2002 01:18, Dave Jones wrote:
> > On Sun, Sep 08, 2002 at 09:28:11PM +0200, Daniel Mehrmann wrote:
> >  > Hi Alan,
> >  >
> >  > i add for the AMD Athlon family some optimize compilerflags.
> >  > Gcc 3.1 and 3.2 support more specific Athlon instructions as
> >  > 3.0 or 2.95x. This patch for 2.4.19, 2.4.20-pre5 and 2.5.33
> >  > set a new "-march" flag:
> >  >
> >  > Athlon TB/Duron 		+= -march=athlon-tbird
> >  > Athlon XP/Athlon4/Duron	+= -march=athlon-xp
> >  > Athlon MP				+= -march=athlon-mp
> >
> > I thought these were all just gcc aliases for the same options ?
> > It's been a while since I looked at the gcc option parser, so
> > I've forgotten exactly what happens, but at least you missed the
> > bogus athlon-4 option.
> >
> > Are the gains between all these options really worth the added
> > complexity ?
> >
> >         Dave
> 
> Hi Dave,
> 
> yes, you`re right with the athlon-4 option. Well, first thing, the mobile athlon
> have the same core as XP (Palomino) expect some "speed scheudle". 
> I never see that we support mobile chips. So i think it`s enough that we 
> put Athlon4 into the "XP group". I think too the new core "Thoroughbread" 
> should use the "XP group". 
> 
> I readed the gcc documentation, gcc-3.2 only, very deep. This was the idea for this patch.
> Then i looked fast into gcc-3.1/3.0/2.95x. I believe that the compiler create own code 
> for *every* chip-release. chip-release as: athlon-tbird, athlon-xp, ...
> 
> Also take a look into the binary code and size. It`s different. 
> 
> chears,
> Daniel
> 
>    
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

-- 
Stephane Wirtel <stephane.wirtel@belgacom.net>
Web : www.linux-mons.be	 "Linux Is Not UniX !!!"
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/