588
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 13 Feb 2024
588 points (97.3% liked)
Technology
59174 readers
1995 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Is it really that hard to include a fallback though? Obviously there's a way to collect the information without that flag. I suppose if you didn't want to take a performance hitting checking the flag all the time it could become a compile option (I would think anyone running that old of hardware would be willing to learn how to compile the kernel anyway), but there should be options available to keep the support available some how?
That's pretty much exactly how it works already. You compile with
-march=x86-64-v4and it'll use SSE and AVX all over the place.glibc does the runtime thing, but only once on application startup where the dynamic linker will link the version of the function optimized for your CPU. But it's a manual process on glibc's part, the variants are written by hand.
Not every project cares enough to do it dynamically like that and it would be a nightmare that way.
The fallback is, recompile with
-march=x86-64which will only use the base set of instructions. Or-march=i486if you want to run on absolutely ancient hardware.