As a general rule, I'd prefer not to have extra glibc builds. The bug report points out that most of the critical optimizations are handles by IFUNC, is there a solid argument for why we should have two builds as well? Given that the followup request would almost certainly be to ship both by default, we'd end up with a fair amount of filesystem bloat, and it's also a bit of a packaging nightmare (there was great rejoicing from my end when I killed libc6-i686, the last "tuned" build of glibc we had).
For i386 versus i686, there were some very reasonable arguments. The mandatory FPU, the extra registers, cmov, etc, etc. Generic compiler tuninng of i386 versus i686 gave very obvious real world performance increases. I'm dubious that this would be true for p8 versus p9. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1702917 Title: [Feature] P9: Power9 CPU tuned libraries To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu-power-systems/+bug/1702917/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
