On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 1:17 PM, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 2:03 PM, Jason L Tibbitts III <tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:With x86_64 (hopefully) covering the majority of the modern systems
>>>>>> "BN" == Bill Nottingham <notting@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> BN> Please re-read.
>
> No need.
>
> BN> "the only statistics we have available".
>
> "are flawed". Don't quote them at all if you know they aren't
> correct. That's my only point here.
>
> BN> If you've got better ones, please share.
>
> You know I don't. You also know that my not having any doesn't have
> any bearing at all on the fact that you shouldn't be quoting
> statistics you know to be incorrect.
what is the harm in leaving x86 i586 compatible?
Isn't the only difference in arch=i686 as far as userspace is
concerned cmov? It seems that some people question the general
usefulness of cmov:
http://ondioline.org/mail/cmov-a-bad-idea-on-out-of-order-cpus
"Pentium or better" is a nice understandable break point. "Pentium pro
or better" far less so. Fedora already has an offering for the high
end (x86_64; which also implies many other performance improving
differences)…
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list