Andreas Peters suggested another approach, which makes sense to me : have one plugin with SSE optimizations enabled, another without them and chose at runtime between the two.
What do you think ? On 23/03/2014 20:50, Loic Dachary wrote: > Hi Laurent, > > In the context of optimizing erasure code functions implemented by Kevin > Greenan (cc'ed) and James Plank at > https://bitbucket.org/jimplank/gf-complete/ we ran accross a question you may > have the answer to: can gcc -msse2 (or -msse* for that matter ) have a > negative impact on the portability of the compiled binary code ? > > In other words, if a code is compiled without -msse* and runs fine on all > intel processors it targets, could it be that adding -msse* to the > compilation of the same source code generate a binary that would fail on some > processors ? This is assuming no sse specific functions were used in the > source code. > > In gf-complete, all sse specific instructions are carefully protected to not > be run on a CPU that does not support them. The runtime detection is done by > checking CPU id bits ( see > https://bitbucket.org/jimplank/gf-complete/pull-request/7/probe-intel-sse-features-at-runtime/diff#Lsrc/gf_intel.cT28 > ) > > The corresponding thread is at: > > https://bitbucket.org/jimplank/gf-complete/pull-request/4/defer-the-decision-to-use-a-given-sse/diff#comment-1479296 > > Cheers > -- Loïc Dachary, Artisan Logiciel Libre
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
