On Tue, 23 Jul 2019 12:16:45 +0200 Igor Gnatenko <ignatenkobrain@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 12:08 PM Kevin Kofler > <kevin.kofler@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Igor Gnatenko wrote: > > > 1. Lower requirement to something like SSE4 and select other CPU > > > features which are available in most of CPUs for last decade. > > > > Sorry, but -1 to SSE4 too. One of my machines supports only up to > > SSSE3, and other replies in this thread have also suggested SSSE3 > > as the most we can assume. And if you ask me, we should just stick > > to SSE2 as the baseline. What are the big gains to be had from > > SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, and SSE4.2? Especially if you limit it to > > packages that don't do runtime detection? (Performance-sensitive > > software SHOULD do runtime detection, and most of it does, e.g., > > OpenBLAS.) > > I used SSE4 as an example. Obviously one needs to spend time digging > into all this and find appropriate set. > > From what I saw, openblas does not do any runtime detection. You > either compile it with avx2 or not. And in runtime it will check > whether it was enabled during compilation and use some kind of > fallback. openblas can do a runtime CPU detection for x86, aarch64 and Power, if built accordingly Dan _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
