Message-ID: <37433767.419E0118@lycosmail.com>
Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 18:12:55 -0400
From: Adam Schrotenboer <ajschrotenboer AT lycosmail DOT com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.51 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: pgcc AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: K6 & i686 ASM code
References: <Pine DOT GSO DOT 4 DOT 05 DOT 9905192348140 DOT 959-100000 AT legolas DOT mdh DOT se>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: pgcc AT delorie DOT com

Henrik Berglund SdU wrote:

> On 19 May 1999, Adam Schrotenboer wrote:
>
> > Can the K6(or -2 or III) use i686 ASM code??? Does it support all the
> > same instructions???
> not all instructions, i compiled bytemark with -march=i686 and get
> unknown instruction error.
>
> > I know that the scheduling probably won't be
> > optimal, but I would also wonder if it may be better than i586 asm.
> use -march=k6
>

What about gzip and kernel and zlib ASM code, should I not use gzip/zlib ASM??,
and what about kernel??? I don't know of a choice as to whether or not to use ASM
for that. Can EGCS or PGCC make as good or better code than the hand-optimized
ASM?
At this point I am using EGCS 1.1.2, I don't have PGCC built yet.

>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Henrik DOT Berglund AT mds DOT mdh DOT se
> http://www.mds.mdh.se/~adb94hbd/