On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 5:36 AM, Kirill Yukhin <kirill.yuk...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi HJ, > Thanks for input. I've missed it. > Done. Updated patch is attached.
Compiler may still optimize it away. You need to replace 0 with a function parameter. Please see: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-07/msg02463.html H.J. --- > Thanks, K > > On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 4:26 PM, H.J. Lu <hjl.to...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 5:20 AM, Kirill Yukhin <kirill.yuk...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>> I've merged my changes with trunk (there was a conflict) and fixed typo. >>> Updated patch is attached. Waiting for commit... >>> >>> Thanks, K >>> >>> On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 1:03 PM, Kirill Yukhin <kirill.yuk...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>>> Thanks! >>>> Guys with waa rights, could anybody commit my fix? >>>> >>>> Thanks, K >>>> >>>>> >>>>> OK for mainline. >>>>> >>>>> Uros. >>>>> >>>> >> >> >> +# Return 1 if lzcnt instruction can be compiled. >> +proc check_effective_target_lzcnt { } { >> + return [check_no_compiler_messages lzcnt object { >> + void _lzcnt (void) >> + { >> + __builtin_clzs (0); >> + } >> + } "-O2 -mlzcnt" ] >> +} >> >> GCC may optimize this away. Please fix it similar to: >> >> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-07/msg02463.html >> >
