Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 31 Aug 2007 22:26:25 -0300
From:      JoaoBR <joao@matik.com.br>
To:        freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Cc:        Roman Divacky <rdivacky@freebsd.org>, pluknet <pluknet@gmail.com>, =?iso-8859-1?q?Bj=F6rn_K=F6nig?= <bkoenig@cs.tu-berlin.de>
Subject:   Re: Adding k9 and k10 to bsd.cpu.mk
Message-ID:  <200708312226.26977.joao@matik.com.br>
In-Reply-To: <200708312120.31912.joao@matik.com.br>
References:  <-3502020561049594852@unknownmsgid> <20070901000710.GA12223@dragon.NUXI.org> <200708312120.31912.joao@matik.com.br>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
On Friday 31 August 2007 21:20:30 JoaoBR wrote:
> > > opterons are not easy but it is already kind of advanced cpu so could
> > > be
> >
> > Why are Opteron's any harder?
>
> because all of them are 64bit but some older ones are not SSE3 capable, <
> 250 I guess now but 252 is but not 100% sure


so just a thought, I have no not-sse3 capable anymore so I could check  but=
=20
asking the gcc guys here ...

what if I try to compile with -msse3 and it is not available, does it go=20
through or do I get invalid compile option and if it go through what may it=
=20
cost?




=2D-=20

Jo=E3o







A mensagem foi scaneada pelo sistema de e-mail e pode ser considerada segura.
Service fornecido pelo Datacenter Matik  https://datacenter.matik.com.br



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <http://docs.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200708312226.26977.joao>