Doesn't give much benefit, though, according to Mingo
http://x2.dejanews.com/getdoc.xp?AN=362293483
"but for most RL MTU's the FPU save/restore operation eats
a considerable amount of the saved cycles"
> I was perhaps a bit harsh, but I did say some corner cases. Besides, we all
> know Mingo's asm rocks, so anything he does can't possible count.
Also see Mingo's article on the design flaws of MMX under
http://x2.dejanews.com/getdoc.xp?AN=259104956
"this MMX ISA extension thing is not worth to be generated
by a compiler, it's only worth to make it's way into a
few very specialized assembly functions"
Any program that wants to be portable needs a C version
of any MMX code. This is going to be 1000 times faster
than the emulated MMX version, and it is by definition
performance- critical code. There's no point in emulating
MMX.
-- Erik Corry- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu