Re: [Bluez-devel] ARM optimization

["Cidorvan Leite" <cidorvan@gmail.com>]

Hi!

On Jan 30, 2008 4:26 PM, Brad Midgley <bmidgley@gmail.com> wrote:
> Marcel
>
> The other macros are not being used and I had intended to remove them.
> We use only MUL/MULA.
>
> > My idea would be to keep the semantic of MULA and only make it a two
> > stage thing. In case of no assembler we still use MULA as it is right
> > now, but in case of assembler it calls MULA_ARM which will do the
> > calculations and then the assignment. Will this work? Is the compiler
> > smart enough to optimize the code properly.
>
> I don't know how to do this but maybe Cidorvan can see it.
>

Like you can see in my first e-mail (gcc-no-arm-optimization.txt), gcc
wasn't smart enough to optimize assignments.
The reason to do a macro with assembly code is to force the gcc to use
the right instruction (smlal) and keep the output code clean.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
Bluez-devel mailing list
Bluez-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bluez-devel