Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2007 18:43:23 -0700 From: "David O'Brien" <obrien@freebsd.org> To: JoaoBR <joao@matik.com.br> Cc: Roman Divacky <rdivacky@freebsd.org>, freebsd-current@freebsd.org, pluknet <pluknet@gmail.com>, =?unknown-8bit?Q?Bj=F6rn_K=F6nig?= <bkoenig@cs.tu-berlin.de> Subject: Re: Adding k9 and k10 to bsd.cpu.mk Message-ID: <20070901014323.GA41683@dragon.NUXI.org> In-Reply-To: <200708312120.31912.joao@matik.com.br> References: <-3502020561049594852@unknownmsgid> <200708312032.21574.joao@matik.com.br> <20070901000710.GA12223@dragon.NUXI.org> <200708312120.31912.joao@matik.com.br>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Aug 31, 2007 at 09:20:30PM -0300, JoaoBR wrote: > On Friday 31 August 2007 21:07:10 David O'Brien 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 It's not Opteron model # specific - but silicon revision specific. There are rev C0 model 250's, along with rev CG, and rev E. Same for athlon64 - older ones don't support SSE3, newer ones do. > people 'kind of familiarly' with reading manuals and specs are already > having difficulties here so imagin an average user (unkndefspec) who > likes to optimize his kernel (his cpu's kernel of course :) ) > > so as far as there are a cpu options for a freebsd kernel they should > be understandable so it might be worse thinking well before doing > (=less support = less questions = less problemas) BTW, the AMD offically sanctioned spelling for GCC 'march' is "amdfam10" -- -- David (obrien@FreeBSD.org) Q: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. A: Why is top-posting (putting a reply at the top of the message) frowned upon? Let's not play "Jeopardy-style quoting"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070901014323.GA41683>