On 29/3/20 11:17 pm, Filipe Laíns wrote: > I would also like to note that rebuilding everything with forced > support for AVX2 or whatever won't have much effect. Most packages do > not have workloads where it would make use sense to use these CPU > extensions, and as such, GCC would not use them.
That assumes we just add AVX2. Whereas, requiring a CPU supporting AVX2 would bring other optimizations that would be used. As I replied earlier, AVX2 may be going too far. But is a good starting point for discussion. If that is too far, what could we accept? SSE4.2? AVX? Surely we can do better than pure x86_64. To have a separate architecture would require automated builds, which requires being able to sign packages automatically. And we have not achieved database signing in 9 years.... I'm looking for a boost that could be achieved now. Allan