Re: hwcap supporting architectures?
At Tue, 18 Jan 2005 22:09:03 -0600,
Marcelo E. Magallon <email@example.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 17, 2005 at 05:52:04PM +0900, GOTO Masanori wrote:
> > > > > Yes, and if ev67 is instruction upper compatible with ev56 (I
> > > > > guess so), I think it's acceptable to add a symlink "ln -sf
> > > > > lib/ev67/libfoo.so lib/ev56/libfoo.so".
> > > >
> > > > Ugh... that pushes the burden of maitaining support for new
> > > > architectures to the package.
> > Yeah - I think it's trade off - whether we support library
> > optimization package or we don't get a bit performance improvement.
> So, you are trading maintainance cost for a rather subjective speed
> improvent? Or should I say, preventing some performance degradation?
The reason why I don't try to clear hwcap issue in documentation is: I
don't want to battle to someone about this kind of issue. Buying new
hardware improves performance. I don't reply any more.