Features/ArchitectureSupport - changing what we build for

[Gregory Maxwell]

On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 2:03 PM, Jason L Tibbitts III <tibbs at math.uh.edu> wrote:
>>>>>> "BN" == Bill Nottingham <notting at redhat.com> writes:
>
> BN> Please re-read.
>
> No need.
>
> BN> "the only statistics we have available".
>
> "are flawed".  Don't quote them at all if you know they aren't
> correct.  That's my only point here.
>
> BN> If you've got better ones, please share.
>
> You know I don't.  You also know that my not having any doesn't have
> any bearing at all on the fact that you shouldn't be quoting
> statistics you know to be incorrect.

With x86_64 (hopefully) covering the majority of the modern systems
what is the harm in leaving x86 i586 compatible?

Isn't the only difference in arch=i686 as far as userspace is
concerned cmov? It seems that some people question the general
usefulness of cmov:
http://ondioline.org/mail/cmov-a-bad-idea-on-out-of-order-cpus

"Pentium or better" is a nice understandable break point. "Pentium pro
or better" far less so. Fedora already has an offering for the high
end (x86_64; which also implies many other performance improving
differences)…