From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga07.intel.com (mga07.intel.com [134.134.136.100]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 468612B98 for ; Mon, 10 Oct 2016 17:22:00 +0200 (CEST) Received: from fmsmga005.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.32]) by orsmga105.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 10 Oct 2016 08:21:59 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.31,324,1473145200"; d="scan'208";a="18071613" Received: from irsmsx108.ger.corp.intel.com ([163.33.3.3]) by fmsmga005.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 10 Oct 2016 08:21:58 -0700 Received: from irsmsx109.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.13.6]) by IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.11.164]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002; Mon, 10 Oct 2016 16:21:57 +0100 From: "Pattan, Reshma" To: Thomas Monjalon , "Liu, Yong" CC: "dev@dpdk.org" Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] mk: gcc -march support for intel processors code names Thread-Index: AQHSGTNIf+AEs0A+40WT1vN4MxKJpKChwTAAgAAf7uA= Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2016 15:21:57 +0000 Message-ID: <3AEA2BF9852C6F48A459DA490692831F010ADCFC@IRSMSX109.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <57EB30E0.30106@intel.com> <2578548.bj2dOLfXoi@xps13> In-Reply-To: <2578548.bj2dOLfXoi@xps13> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-titus-metadata-40: eyJDYXRlZ29yeUxhYmVscyI6IiIsIk1ldGFkYXRhIjp7Im5zIjoiaHR0cDpcL1wvd3d3LnRpdHVzLmNvbVwvbnNcL0ludGVsMyIsImlkIjoiNDM1M2QxZGQtMjk5MC00ZTlmLWEwMGEtNjJmZWNhZTU2MzFmIiwicHJvcHMiOlt7Im4iOiJDVFBDbGFzc2lmaWNhdGlvbiIsInZhbHMiOlt7InZhbHVlIjoiQ1RQX0lDIn1dfV19LCJTdWJqZWN0TGFiZWxzIjpbXSwiVE1DVmVyc2lvbiI6IjE1LjkuNi42IiwiVHJ1c3RlZExhYmVsSGFzaCI6IjdpckxmWEFndThibUlOM0JzQjE5Um9TTnBqcmtlRGxwaExmQTRLMmRnM1E9In0= x-ctpclassification: CTP_IC x-originating-ip: [163.33.239.180] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] mk: gcc -march support for intel processors code names X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2016 15:22:00 -0000 Hi Thomas > -----Original Message----- > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com] > Sent: Monday, October 10, 2016 3:26 PM > To: Liu, Yong ; Pattan, Reshma > > Cc: dev@dpdk.org > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] mk: gcc -march support for intel proce= ssors > code names >=20 > 2016-09-28 10:54, Liu, Yong: > > Tested-by: Yong Liu > > FangFang Wei > [...] > > Description: Build test on different distributions > > Command / instruction: > > Verify build pass on listed distributions. > > > > OS GCC Kernel > > Ubuntu 16.04 5.4.0 4.4.0-36-generic > > Fedora23 5.3.1 4.2.3-300 > > Fedora24 6.1.1 4.6.4-301 > > Ubuntu 12.04 4.6.3 3.8.0-29 > > Ubuntu 12.04 i686 4.6.3 3.8.0-29 > > Ubuntu 14.04 4.8.4 3.16.0-30 > > Ubuntu 14.04 i686 4.8.4 3.16.0-30 > > Fedora18 4.7.2 3.6.10-4 > > Fedora18 i686 4.7.2 3.6.10-4 > > Fedora20 4.8.2 3.15.6-200 > > Fedora20 i686 4.8.3 3.11.0 > > Suse11SP2 4.5.1 3.0.13-0.2 > > Suse12SP3 4.7.2 3.7.10-1.1 > > RHEL7.0 4.8.2 3.10.0-123 > > RHEL7.2 4.8.5 3.10.0-327 > > CentOS7.0 4.8.5 3.10.0-327 > > FreeBSD10.0 4.8.4 10.0-RELEASE > > FreeBSD10.3 4.8.5 10.3-RELEASE >=20 > I do not understand this test. > This patch is dropping a lot of optimizations with compilers older than 4= .9 ! >=20 > Why not recommend GCC 4.9 and keep the graceful degradation for older > versions, at least for one more year, even if it is not optimal for newer > architectures? I am ok with the idea, so should I send latest patch by keeping the code in= mk/toolchain/gcc/rte.toolchain-compat.mk untouched/intact? Thanks, Reshma