This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the glibc project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [PATCH] Alpha hwcaps


Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> writes:

> On Wed, Mar 03, 2004 at 09:10:14AM +0100, Falk Hueffner wrote:
> > But the common code looks only at a single platform. I would for
> > example want to have a fallback from ev67 to ev6 if there's no ev67
> > version, and then to ev56 and so on.
> 
> Then use symlinks.

That is possible, but puts the burden on whoever installs libraries.

> What search path does ld.so with your patch use with say
> LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/usr/lib (LD_DEBUG=all will write it in the
> beginning)?

search path=/usr/lib/ev68:/usr/lib/ev67:/usr/lib/ev6:/usr/lib/pca56:/usr/lib/ev56:/usr/lib/ev5

> On i686, the search path is already too long:
> search path=/usr/lib/tls/i686/mmx:/usr/lib/tls/i686:/usr/lib/tls/mmx:/usr/lib/tls:/usr/lib/i686/mmx:/usr/lib/i686:/usr/lib/mmx:/usr/lib
> 
> > > How many libraries do you expect to use MAX insns?
> > 
> > Not a lot. However, if one had the fallback model, there would be no
> > harm in adding it.
> 
> Except for the runtime cost...

Hmm, right. Maybe one should leave out ev7 and ev68 then, which are
somewhat unlikely to be useful. That would leave at most 6 stats. Does
that sound acceptable?

-- 
	Falk


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]