> >This is not correct. OS's on P-III have to be updated to provide proper
> > context switch support for the SSE registers. I'm pretty sure Win98 has it
> > covered. It's really the same type of jump as AltiVec - use of SSE
> > features is not restricted to OS or driver code, apps use them
> >This is not correct. OS's on P-III have to be updated to provide proper
> > context switch support for the SSE registers. I'm pretty sure Win98 has it
> > covered. It's really the same type of jump as AltiVec - use of SSE
> > features is not restricted to OS or driver code, apps use them
Rob Barris wrote:
> >> As far as I can tell, by ignoring it, and making the assumption that
> >> only low-level libraries will use the vector registers.
>This is not correct. OS's on P-III have to be updated to provide proper
> context switch support for the SSE registers. I'm pretty sure W
>> > Because with Altivec we need to save V registers, right ? Well, I suppose
>> > intel developers had the same problem with P-III "vector" unit. How
>>did they
>> > solve the problem ?
>>
>> As far as I can tell, by ignoring it, and making the assumption that
>> only low-level libraries will us
Giuliano Pochini wrote:
> From altivec p. e. m.: "1.2.6 - The AltiVec vector unit never generates an
> exception"
>
> I just started to read the book, but I think AltiVec tells nothing even on
> things like divisions by 0, etc.
C++ exceptions, not machine exceptions:
if (failure()) thow Oops
Hello,
I've gotten about 40 copies of this message in the past two days.
According to my maillogs it is being sent from debian-68k-bounce. Is
anyone else having this problem, or is it just me?
TIA,
cbb
Giuliano Pochini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > Because with Altivec we need to save V
> > Because with Altivec we need to save V registers, right ? Well, I suppose
> > intel developers had the same problem with P-III "vector" unit. How did they
> > solve the problem ?
>
> As far as I can tell, by ignoring it, and making the assumption that
> only low-level libraries will use the v
Giuliano Pochini wrote:
Giuliano Pochini wrote:
> > As the jmp_buf is a different size in Altivec and non-Altivec code
>
> Because with Altivec we need to save V registers, right ? Well, I suppose
> intel developers had the same problem with P-III "vector" unit. How did they
> solve the problem
> Altivec raises an interesting question of binary compatibility, in the
> area of C++ exceptions and C setjmp/longjmp.
>
> As the jmp_buf is a different size in Altivec and non-Altivec code
Because with Altivec we need to save V registers, right ? Well, I suppose
intel developers had the same
Altivec raises an interesting question of binary compatibility, in the
area of C++ exceptions and C setjmp/longjmp.
As the jmp_buf is a different size in Altivec and non-Altivec code, it
is not possible to jump or pass exceptions between the two. This is a
problem, because:
1) Now would not be a
10 matches
Mail list logo
