Re: P4 compile options

From: Denis Vlasenko (vda@port.imtp.ilyichevsk.odessa.ua)
Date: Fri Nov 22 2002 - 08:22:53 EST

Next message: Denis Vlasenko: "Re: Interrupts problem with 3com network cards on dual-cpu systems ?"
Previous message: Dhammika Pathirana: "[PATCH] misc_register failure 2.5.48"
In reply to: Dave Jones: "Re: P4 compile options"
Next in thread: Dave Jones: "Re: P4 compile options"
Reply: Dave Jones: "Re: P4 compile options"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On 21 November 2002 18:40, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 21, 2002 at 09:18:30PM +0100, Margit Schubert-While wrote:
> > Maybe a dumb question -
> > Is it possible to use the "-march=pentium4 -mfpmath=sse -msse2"
> > options for a P4 ?
> > I notice anything over a P2 just gets "-march=i686".
>
> This is already done in 2.5. (Well, the -march anyways)

I'd say benefits of compiling p4-optimized code are questionable.
Are you sure your kernel will run faster, not slower?
Benchmark numbers? Or it's only warm and fuzzy feeling?

Warm and fuzzy feelings of kernels compiled for very new processors
quickly disappear when you try to boot e.g. 486 with them ;)

--
vda
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: Denis Vlasenko: "Re: Interrupts problem with 3com network cards on dual-cpu systems ?"
Previous message: Dhammika Pathirana: "[PATCH] misc_register failure 2.5.48"
In reply to: Dave Jones: "Re: P4 compile options"
Next in thread: Dave Jones: "Re: P4 compile options"
Reply: Dave Jones: "Re: P4 compile options"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Nov 23 2002 - 22:00:39 EST