| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <1355057981.88866.YahooMailNeo@web140001.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2012 04:59:41 -0800 (PST) From: John <da_audiophile@...oo.com> To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de> Cc: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH] Expand CPU compiler options > Oh, maybe I wasn't clear - I wasn't talking about statistical > significance but rather about practical significance. OK. I will not argue with that :) > A minuscule speedup (a lot less than 1%) showing only in a *single* > workload so far and relevant only for a *very* *small* number of linux > users - only those who build their own kernels - is simply not worth > including in the kernel. My only confusion is why some of these are already included in the linux kernel source today, for example CORE2. As I stated in my previous email, the two 'new' ones I tested preform as-good-as or better-than the CORE2 which is already included. Does my confusion make sense? Thanks again for the consideration! -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists