Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2000 12:02:20 -0700 (PDT) From: Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.org> To: "David O'Brien" <obrien@FreeBSD.org> Cc: current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: OpenSSL asm optimizations Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0004241158360.77386-100000@freefall.freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <20000424114818.F12417@dragon.nuxi.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 24 Apr 2000, David O'Brien wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 21, 2000 at 07:28:28PM -0700, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> > patch to sys.mk which defined MACHINE_CPU ?= i386). Set MACHINE_CPU to
> > "i586" or "i686" (both are actually identical at present) and rebuild.
>
> Please also support "k5" and "k6".
Actually it raises the question I was going to frame of how to specify the
set of CPU revisions which are compatible. For example, k5 and k6 want
i586 optimizations as a fallback (if no k5/6 native optimizations
available), k6 wants k5, i586 wants i486 etc.
The easiest way I can think of is to specify MACHINE_CPU as a list: e.g.
for a k6 it might be "k6 k5 i586 i486 i386" specifying that any of those
optimizations should be used. It would be best to make it an ordered list,
i.e. in order of preference, but I'll have to think about the
implementation implications.
Kris
----
In God we Trust -- all others must submit an X.509 certificate.
-- Charles Forsythe <forsythe@alum.mit.edu>
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.21.0004241158360.77386-100000>