[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200905031308.51316.tobias.doerffel@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 3 May 2009 13:08:45 +0200
From: Tobias Doerffel <tobias.doerffel@...il.com>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>,
"Pallipadi, Venkatesh" <venkatesh.pallipadi@...el.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Specific support for Intel Atom architecture
Am Sonntag, 3. Mai 2009 08:48:54 schrieb H. Peter Anvin:
> Willy Tarreau wrote:
> >> $(call cc-option,-march=atom,-march=i686)
> >
> > if it's an in-order architecture, wouldn't it be better to tune for i386
> > or i486 instead ?
>
> Possibly. It would be worth measuring.
How would one do that (never benchmarked kernel stuff before)?
Regards,
Tobias
Download attachment "signature.asc " of type "application/pgp-signature" (198 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists