On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 12:08:31AM +0100, Andy Polyakov via RT wrote: > > In Debian we ship several versions of the shared libraries on i386. > > One that's build the default instruction set of that architecture > > (which is still i486 I think), and then 2 optimised versions, > > one for 586 and one for 686. The 586 and 686 versions use the > > assembler and so have AES_ASM defined. The dynamic linker picks > > the proper shared library depending on the CPU. > > Why don't you compile assembler even in "default instruction set" build? > Even though modules are called 586, they run even on 486 (and can be > compiled for 386). 586 is merely a reference to the way instructions > were scheduled at some point in time, now it effectively lost the > meaning. Moreover, I'd argue that single assembler build is sufficient, > because a) assembler code detects processor it executes on; b) potential
As far as I know, this detection is not supported on a real 486. > > As far as I understand things, the padlock extention is only > > available on 686 processors. > > What is 686 processor? One defined by -march=i686 gcc option? VIA C7 and > Nano surely falls to this category, but I've never seen C3... As I understand it, they can all execute 686 with cmov instructions. Kurt ______________________________________________________________________ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org Development Mailing List openssl-dev@openssl.org Automated List Manager majord...@openssl.org
