| 1 |
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 10:05 PM, Florian Philipp <lists@×××××××××××.net> wrote: |
| 2 |
> Am 17.08.2012 19:57, schrieb Jorge Almeida: |
| 3 |
>> I read in http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-895104.html : |
| 4 |
>> atom |
| 5 |
>> Intel Atom CPU with 64-bit extensions, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3 and SSSE3 |
| 6 |
>> instruction set support. |
| 7 |
>> |
| 8 |
>> Does this mean that these flags are pulled by -mtune=atom, or do we need to |
| 9 |
>> ask for them explicitly? The WiKi shows how to find which flags are pulled by |
| 10 |
>> -march=native, but not the other cases. |
| 11 |
>> |
| 12 |
>> Thanks |
| 13 |
>> |
| 14 |
>> Jorge Almeida |
| 15 |
>> |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> Oh, sorry, I didn't think of the second generation atoms. I guess your |
| 18 |
> newer atom is a bit more different from prescott than the one I talked |
| 19 |
> about. Anyway, using -march=prescott is still viable. It just means you |
| 20 |
> lose a bit more in terms of usable SSE extensions on your atom. |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> Your CFLAGS look good to me. They won't pull in anything that your |
| 23 |
> prescott cannot handle. |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
Does -march=prescott not ensure that the prescott will work even if |
| 26 |
unsupported flags are added? Of, course such flags wouldn't be of use by the |
| 27 |
prescott, but the atom might be able to use them. Can you confirm this? |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
Thanks, |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Jorge Almeida |
Archives