Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 21 Nov 2016 10:07:49 -0800
From:      John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>
To:        Warner Losh <imp@freebsd.org>
Cc:        src-committers@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, svn-src-head@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: svn commit: r308869 - head/sbin/nvmecontrol
Message-ID:  <123365400.XYmKG93e4H@ralph.baldwin.cx>
In-Reply-To: <201611192146.uAJLkDP5094317@repo.freebsd.org>
References:  <201611192146.uAJLkDP5094317@repo.freebsd.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Saturday, November 19, 2016 09:46:13 PM Warner Losh wrote:
> Author: imp
> Date: Sat Nov 19 21:46:13 2016
> New Revision: 308869
> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/308869
> 
> Log:
>   i386 turns out to not have __uint128_t. So confusingly use 64-bit math
>   instead. Since we're little endian, we can get away with it. Also,
>   since the counters in quesitons would require billions of iops for
>   tens of billions of seconds to overflow, and since such data rates are
>   unlikely for people using i386 for a while, that's OK. The fastest
>   cards today can't do even a million IOPs.
>   
>   Noticed by: dim@
>   Sponsored by: Netflix, Inc

It probably has it if you compile with -march=<foo> where <foo> is new
enough to have SSE.

Is nvme inherently x86-only?

-- 
John Baldwin



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?123365400.XYmKG93e4H>