From: Oliver Falk (oliverlinux-kernel.at)
Date: Tue Nov 25 2008 - 08:44:59 CST

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Marc Schlensog wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Nov 2008 15:18:23 +0100
> Oliver Falk <oliverlinux-kernel.at> wrote:
>
>> Matt Turner wrote:
>>> Oliver,
>>>
>>>> Jay. Since we don't support < EV5, would it be save to use those
>>>> instead?
>>> BWX appeared in the EV56, and MVI appeared in PCA56 (the generation
>>> after EV56). So the real question is: do you want to support >EV5,
>>> EV56, or >PCA56. Obviously >PCA56 is the easiest, plus, who still
>>> uses a plain EV5?
>> Oh. Right... /me was wrong :-(
>>
>> Well, I need at least EV56 compatibility (because of my AS4100 and
>> AS1000(A))...
>>
>> I don't know what other users are running... But I'd guess >= EV56.
>>
>> Guys, what do you think would happen if a binary compiled with
>> BXW/MVI would run on < EV56?
>
> Don't know... does gcc support something like Compaq's -march/-mtune?

Of course it does. And if you use it, it does tune for the various
features like BXW, MVI, ...

-of

_______________________________________________
axp-list mailing list
axp-listredhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/axp-list

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]