[llvm-commits] patch: Lower glibc's x86 bswap_32() inline asm
dalej at apple.com
Wed May 27 19:20:18 CDT 2009
On May 27, 2009, at 5:11 PMPDT, Dan Gohman wrote:
> On May 27, 2009, at 2:14 PM, Chris Lattner wrote:
>>> I think it is best to recommend -march=pentium4 at the very least,
>>> get SSE2 support.
>> However, I don't see why this means we shouldn't take the patch
>> though, if it is ok. Can someone review the patch?
> In a properly configured compiler, the could would never be
> executed. I've now updated README.LLVM with the information that
> I have about the configuration.
Possibly we should hack the gcc build to default to our chosen
configuration? This would mean the defaults are different from normal
gcc, but that's probably OK.
The gcc community feels strongly it's important to have builds work
seamlessly, at least in common environments (somebody posted that view
here, Zack Weinberg I think, and it is widely held). I'm not sure I
agree with this; the people we want working on llvm should be able to
figure it out, at least if we give reasonable directions in
README.LLVM, right? But it's a view.
More information about the llvm-commits