X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 required=5.0 	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SARE_MSGID_LONG40
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <4BA5AAA3.5060606@slittle.com>
References: <4BA452E4 DOT 7050600 AT slittle DOT com> <4BA4E1B2 DOT 3020507 AT gmail DOT com> 	 <4BA54492 DOT 8050903 AT slittle DOT com> 	 <416096c61003202058s40c2f423p2fff76df652981f5 AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> 	 <4BA5AAA3 DOT 5060606 AT slittle DOT com>
Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2010 06:45:53 +0000
Message-ID: <416096c61003202345j5a412a62s48b61292a9192f21@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Cygwin vs Via C3: nothing happens, no output
From: Andy Koppe <andy DOT koppe AT gmail DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:cygwin-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

scott:
>>> According to the internets... the C3 purports to be a i686-class
>>> processor
>> Without CMOV or out-of-order execution, that seems a bit of a scam.
> [snip]
>> For gcc, "i686" implies the presence of the CMOV instruction, because,
>> well, CMOV was introduced with the Intel 686 (aka Pentium Pro).
>
> What's in a name? GCC can define it as march=hamburger but that doesn't
> make it so, it's just a name of convenience/convention.

Good luck with trying to get GCC to change their definition of "i686".


> I assume
> Intel's specs/contracts define what is/can be called an i686, so if they
> say it's optional then the C3 is still a legit i686 even if CMOV support
> is more common.

Where do you get that idea from that CMOV is optional? Yes, there's a
CPUID feature bit representing CMOV, but that's always set on the
i686, its descendants, and compatible processors. Pre-Nehemiah C3s are
not fully 686-compatible, simple as that.


>> Btw, that was almost fifteen years ago.
>
> Well, if ya wanna make a fanless i686 (ish) CPU that runs on five (5)
> watts or less, you gotta leave a few things out.

Maybe so, but you can't then go out and demand that everyone else
doesn't use those features.


> This just means my legacy app is stuck on a 60watt beigebox instead

C3-Nehemiah? C7? Atom?

Andy

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple