Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2007 22:26:25 -0300 From: JoaoBR <joao@matik.com.br> To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Cc: Roman Divacky <rdivacky@freebsd.org>, pluknet <pluknet@gmail.com>, =?iso-8859-1?q?Bj=F6rn_K=F6nig?= <bkoenig@cs.tu-berlin.de> Subject: Re: Adding k9 and k10 to bsd.cpu.mk Message-ID: <200708312226.26977.joao@matik.com.br> In-Reply-To: <200708312120.31912.joao@matik.com.br> References: <-3502020561049594852@unknownmsgid> <20070901000710.GA12223@dragon.NUXI.org> <200708312120.31912.joao@matik.com.br>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Friday 31 August 2007 21:20:30 JoaoBR wrote: > > > opterons are not easy but it is already kind of advanced cpu so could > > > be > > > > Why are Opteron's any harder? > > because all of them are 64bit but some older ones are not SSE3 capable, < > 250 I guess now but 252 is but not 100% sure so just a thought, I have no not-sse3 capable anymore so I could check but= =20 asking the gcc guys here ... what if I try to compile with -msse3 and it is not available, does it go=20 through or do I get invalid compile option and if it go through what may it= =20 cost? =2D-=20 Jo=E3o A mensagem foi scaneada pelo sistema de e-mail e pode ser considerada segura. Service fornecido pelo Datacenter Matik https://datacenter.matik.com.br
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200708312226.26977.joao>