<html> <head> <base href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/" /> </head> <body> <div> <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - Flightgear crashes during splashboot with R600 driver, LLVM 3.7.0 and mesa 11.0.2" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=92214#c37">Comment # 37</a> on <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - Flightgear crashes during splashboot with R600 driver, LLVM 3.7.0 and mesa 11.0.2" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=92214">bug 92214</a> from <a class="email" href="mailto:jfonseca@vmware.com" title="Jose Fonseca <jfonseca@vmware.com>"> Jose Fonseca</a> <pre>(In reply to Roland Scheidegger from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=92214#c36">comment #36</a>) > I don't think llvm's behavior makes sense. We got the cpu name from llvm, > that we have to manually list cpu features which it CAN'T use when just > using that name then is imho crazy. I've updated the llvm bug accordingly. The fact is that the cpu name is ambigous, so whether LLVM takes the "usually" support features, vs the "minimally" supported features is really a matter of convention. We should set negative flags where appropriate. My concern is whether passing "-sse4_1" to a non-Intel CPU will cause problems. A quick check with altivec shows that's the case: '-altivec' is not a recognized feature for this target (ignoring feature) I'll attach a patch that should fix this.</pre> </div> <hr> You are receiving this mail because: <ul> <li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li> </ul> </body> </html>