From: hasdi AT umich DOT edu (Hasdi Rodzmann Hashim) Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp Subject: Re: Using inline MMX assembly Date: 18 Mar 1998 01:48:07 GMT Lines: 31 Message-ID: <6en94n$lgr@srvr1.engin.umich.edu> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: joust.rs.itd.umich.edu To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp Precedence: bulk Eli Zaretskii (eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il) wrote: : On Tue, 17 Mar 1998, Salvador Eduardo Tropea (SET) wrote: : > Dirk Stevens wrote: : > : > > Can this be done with DJGPP ?? : > : > Yes, but there are a bug in one of the opcodes (PAND or something like this). : > A patch for it anb a GCC adapted to generate MMX code can be found in the : > following link: : How about patching the DJGPP-compiled binaries on SimTel.NET? If you are talking about binutils, I'll say go ahead, it's only a one line patch. On the other hand, this bug was reported to cygnus (check dejanews) and they plan to release the fix on the next release (I don't know if we have to pay them for that). For GCC+MMX patch, I'll say wait first. This patch is not fit for public consumption (just for general feedback). If I get some encouragement, I'll speed up the process, persuade the gcc maintainers to patch up 2.7.2.x tree. I plan to add support VIS, MAX (PA-RISC 2.0) and MAX (AXP) and plain ol 486. Let me tell you right now that you can perform 8 parallel addition to at most 6 cycles on *ANY* 64-bit machine. With MMX, this drops to 1 cycle. Let me know if you have problems using the patch. Later Hasdi GCC-MMX extensions for 2.7.2.x: http://www-personal.umich.edu/~hasdi/mmx.html