From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S270651AbTGUTIw (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Jul 2003 15:08:52 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S270653AbTGUTIw (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Jul 2003 15:08:52 -0400 Received: from vladimir.pegasys.ws ([64.220.160.58]:46344 "EHLO vladimir.pegasys.ws") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S270651AbTGUTIr (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Jul 2003 15:08:47 -0400 Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2003 12:23:43 -0700 From: jw schultz To: Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: Kernel 2.4 CPU Arch issues] Message-ID: <20030721192343.GA5537@pegasys.ws> Mail-Followup-To: jw schultz , Linux Kernel Mailing List References: <3F1B25C2.8010403@jmu.edu> <1058745605.6299.4.camel@dhcp22.swansea.linux.org.uk> <3F1B32E6.4020107@jmu.edu> <1058769556.6977.2.camel@dhcp22.swansea.linux.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1058769556.6977.2.camel@dhcp22.swansea.linux.org.uk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.27i X-Message-Flag: This message may cause mental anguish to the close-minded. Read at your own risk. Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jul 21, 2003 at 07:39:16AM +0100, Alan Cox wrote: > On Llu, 2003-07-21 at 01:25, William M. Quarles wrote: > > Well, wouldn't changing the gcc -march option and/or adding -mcpu > > options for the various processors in the Makefile make a difference, as > > the patchfile suggests? > > Currently - no. gcc knows a lot more processor names that require individual > unique optimisation no && s/that/than/ -- ________________________________________________________________ J.W. Schultz Pegasystems Technologies email address: jw@pegasys.ws Remember Cernan and Schmitt