From owner-freebsd-hackers Wed Mar 21 6:21:33 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from eidolon.muppetlabs.com (eidolon.muppetlabs.com [216.231.41.85]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 324DE37B726 for ; Wed, 21 Mar 2001 06:21:31 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from breadbox@eidolon.muppetlabs.com) Received: (from breadbox@localhost) by eidolon.muppetlabs.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id GAA07389; Wed, 21 Mar 2001 06:21:14 -0800 Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2001 06:21:14 -0800 Message-Id: <200103211421.GAA07389@eidolon.muppetlabs.com> From: Brian Raiter To: "Matthew Emmerton" Cc: "David Malone" , "Aaron Smith" , , Subject: Re: gzip's custom i386 asm should be disabled In-Reply-To: <006101c0b210$c400edf0$1200a8c0@gsicomp.on.ca> References: <20010320174630.B82004@gelatinous.com> <017d01c0b1ab$df4be1b0$1200a8c0@gsicomp.on.ca> <20010321114832.A31809@walton.maths.tcd.ie> <006101c0b210$c400edf0$1200a8c0@gsicomp.on.ca> Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG >>> I sure hope I'm not the only one with a "lab" of 4 FreeBSD >>> machines that are all 486s or 586s. >> >> You may find that the 686 assembly is as fast on a 386/486/586 as >> the old assembly is. Maybe you could test it and let the list know? > > I was under the impression that the 586/686 code uses instructions > that are not present on 386/486 machines, so I doubt that it would > help. Bite your tongue! The youngest instruction in my patches is movzx, which was introduced with the 386. b To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message