This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH] Consolidate and inline calls to __acr
- From: Siddhesh Poyarekar <siddhesh at redhat dot com>
- To: munroesj at us dot ibm dot com
- Cc: "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>, "Carlos O'Donell" <carlos at systemhalted dot org>, libc-alpha at sourceware dot org
- Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2013 09:29:18 +0530
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Consolidate and inline calls to __acr
- References: <20121231134715.GD21621@spoyarek.pnq.redhat.com><50E1AD98.5060005@systemhalted.org><Pine.LNX.4.64.1212311559120.17913@digraph.polyomino.org.uk><20121231161323.GE21621@spoyarek.pnq.redhat.com><1357157024.19573.55.camel@spokane1.rchland.ibm.com>
On Wed, Jan 02, 2013 at 02:03:44PM -0600, Steven Munroe wrote:
> I would disagree (as the original author of the powerpc specific
> optimization).
>
> The source level loop unrolling in sysdeps/powerpc/powerpc[32|
> 64]/power4/fpu/mpa.c when combined with Makefile CFLAGS-mpa.c is similar
> in kind to the ./x86_64/fpu/multiarch/[mpa-avx.c|mpa-fma4.c]
> alternatives.
>
> As such arbitrarily removing the powerpc implementation is not
> appropriate. And just fixing the compile time error without
> understanding the performance implications it not appropriate either.
>
I'm going to hold this patch off till I've sorted out the power4 code
- I'll cc you and Ryan on that. I am not suggesting arbitrarily
removing the powerpc implementation either; I'm going to try and come
up with a good reason for doing so :)
Siddhesh