Minimum Supported x86 microarchitecture

Minimum Supported x86 microarchitecture

[Kavanagh, Mark B]

Hi,

The recent reimplementation of rte_memcpy in DPDK v2.0.0 seems to have a placed an implicit floor on the microarchitecture/Instruction set supported by DPDK.

For example, I can't compile head of OVS against DPDK 2.0 with gcc without passing the 'msse3' flag; this points to an implicit minimum  supported CPU of 'core2'. More discussion on same is available here: http://openvswitch.org/pipermail/dev/2015-April/053523.html

Can anyone confirm or deny this, and is/should it be documented?

Thanks in advance,
Mark

Re: Minimum Supported x86 microarchitecture

[Bruce Richardson]

On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 03:09:39PM +0000, Kavanagh, Mark B wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> The recent reimplementation of rte_memcpy in DPDK v2.0.0 seems to have a placed an implicit floor on the microarchitecture/Instruction set supported by DPDK.
> 
> For example, I can't compile head of OVS against DPDK 2.0 with gcc without passing the 'msse3' flag; this points to an implicit minimum  supported CPU of 'core2'. More discussion on same is available here: http://openvswitch.org/pipermail/dev/2015-April/053523.html
> 
> Can anyone confirm or deny this, and is/should it be documented?
> 
> Thanks in advance,
> Mark

SSE3 is the minimum necessary. However, I believe all x86_64 cpus have at least
SSE3 support, so this should only be a problem with 32-bit builds. Is this the
case for you?

/Bruce

Re: Minimum Supported x86 microarchitecture

[Kavanagh, Mark B]

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Richardson, Bruce
>Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 5:05 PM
>To: Kavanagh, Mark B
>Cc: dev-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org
>Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Minimum Supported x86 microarchitecture
>
>On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 03:09:39PM +0000, Kavanagh, Mark B wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> The recent reimplementation of rte_memcpy in DPDK v2.0.0 seems to have a placed an
>implicit floor on the microarchitecture/Instruction set supported by DPDK.
>>
>> For example, I can't compile head of OVS against DPDK 2.0 with gcc without passing the
>'msse3' flag; this points to an implicit minimum  supported CPU of 'core2'. More
>discussion on same is available here: http://openvswitch.org/pipermail/dev/2015-
>April/053523.html
>>
>> Can anyone confirm or deny this, and is/should it be documented?
>>
>> Thanks in advance,
>> Mark
>
>SSE3 is the minimum necessary. However, I believe all x86_64 cpus have at least
>SSE3 support, so this should only be a problem with 32-bit builds. Is this the
>case for you?
>
>/Bruce

Hey Bruce,

No, I'm compiling on an IVB system.