1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. LINUX.GENTOO.USER

  • Re: [gentoo-user] cpuid2cpuflags-16 bmi or bmi1 ?

    From Eli Schwartz@21:1/5 to Adam Carter on Thu May 29 04:20:01 2025
    This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --------------FnVS6FsXvKVYj1Bz99N0EMBx
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

    On 5/28/25 8:30 PM, Adam Carter wrote:
    This version of cpuid2cpuflags now reports more flags, including "bmi1". However, AFAICT the correct flag name (in gcc man page, and grepping
    through PORTDIR is just "bmi").

    Am I missing something? Or should I report a bug?


    You have correctly determined that the correct compiler flag name is
    "bmi". You then repeated yourself twice (I don't know why?) by
    clarifying that PORTDIR also uses "bmi" when passing compiler flags.

    But I don't know why you care.

    cpuid2cpuflags lists valid USE="cpu_flags_x86_{xxx}" values, nothing to
    do with compiler flags. Last week, no such cpu_flags_x86_bmi existed --
    and nor did cpu_flags_x86_bmi1.

    Today, the latter exists, added to Gentoo by the same person who added
    it to cpuid2cpuflags.

    You may question his taste in naming style, if you truly wish, but I
    would find myself hard pressed to see a "typo". It is not "incorrect".


    --
    Eli Schwartz

    --------------FnVS6FsXvKVYj1Bz99N0EMBx--

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

    wnsEABYIACMWIQTnFNnmK0TPZHnXm3qEp9ErcA0vVwUCaDfCDAUDAAAAAAAKCRCEp9ErcA0vV16T AQDOt5LVqZYy5sdQZMb9rXGdIcIk8p/HeP6uv2cwV7GB1wEAx65Ym+vnhttiQz4409BC4Kh1iRZe jtJJpxty3HCrMgo=
    =rxAy
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Michael@21:1/5 to All on Thu May 29 10:05:40 2025
    On Thursday, 29 May 2025 03:10:20 British Summer Time Eli Schwartz wrote:
    On 5/28/25 8:30 PM, Adam Carter wrote:
    This version of cpuid2cpuflags now reports more flags, including "bmi1". However, AFAICT the correct flag name (in gcc man page, and grepping through PORTDIR is just "bmi").

    Am I missing something? Or should I report a bug?

    You have correctly determined that the correct compiler flag name is
    "bmi". You then repeated yourself twice (I don't know why?) by
    clarifying that PORTDIR also uses "bmi" when passing compiler flags.

    But I don't know why you care.

    cpuid2cpuflags lists valid USE="cpu_flags_x86_{xxx}" values, nothing to
    do with compiler flags. Last week, no such cpu_flags_x86_bmi existed --
    and nor did cpu_flags_x86_bmi1.

    Today, the latter exists, added to Gentoo by the same person who added
    it to cpuid2cpuflags.

    You may question his taste in naming style, if you truly wish, but I
    would find myself hard pressed to see a "typo". It is not "incorrect".

    I thought I better check the CPU_FLAGS_X86 entries in my make.conf, which I have not checked since I installed Gentoo and was surprised to see there are new flags there! I mistakenly thought this is a fit and forget configuration element. On one system so far with two new flags, 4 packages are being rebuilt.

    Should I be checking the cpuid2cpuflags every time gcc is upgraded, or are new CPU flags on old CPUs a relatively rare event?
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

    iQIzBAABCAAdFiEEXqhvaVh2ERicA8Ceseqq9sKVZxkFAmg4I2QACgkQseqq9sKV Zxn9Pg//XXf6LXqkWxImq9GWiQ02INN07G1Z09WIozJnjWbKj8lnOJyXwoyJk2t/ zaP2IezBY4y0TEvUDevkJ8OY2kqFcCi+dsD+u/UFaQqX2bXs7+I/Mznd/SQm/j6y hgIK4ZzcdjXELMbRoLyMt+BqNWDPIT/sI44yNHeWjBNnvFbv7exTBMZNHttBspC1 anIH6WlgG/SD2vQlU5ovA+Xr6eXZewpgBw0n/aPl2BAdAboSB1ZV8la41Tgk54en vIuN3J7QjIoD4qvR354Jd/5T6FuRQtMXmsnDrZAqpo1sMLkbfc+8K7Dndta/QmA2 TUumsTg9kGMzICFXq+5+nye8Q9vzuecpwixPuK/EaCO+R4x0dOgWnKuCuldR9rIb Fh+V2eQxtetgXMJWOkoKRG9EoS0JvXmYNeiuIALDgGmep1OPnSmaMBqZ0n6iiH7W uvs2jb8Ej8g6LVjGmc8vw53psC7zI0fUJD2N5QHvVcEftlHIgQcOXyHWYFOdr3gI U9ZPaFccGcTTuXrOs985KFX6sBUzxVo7b5mkJJfMZ8FG0Q8Yd3NXxI1Ds+pce1Wx OUFAJnIvnF/34Z5bnkr/QDcPXOEbcLezP8ZmeXkz23+qiRgGBfkWpVDTDz9FGAnJ FnO05cQTE++nDUHSlIEXhRQAgscWxHv8RH5Y3b9IlgpwiwF84+o=
    =/3Xh
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Michael@21:1/5 to All on Sat May 31 16:06:46 2025
    On Saturday, 31 May 2025 15:42:46 British Summer Time Dr Rainer Woitok wrote:
    Michael,

    On Thu, 29 May 2025 10:05:40 +0100 you wrote:
    ...
    Should I be checking the cpuid2cpuflags every time gcc is upgraded, or are new CPU flags on old CPUs a relatively rare event?

    According to my understanding of

    https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/CPU_FLAGS_*

    I would suggest running

    echo "*/* $(cpuid2cpuflags)" > /etc/portage/package.use/00cpu-flags

    once per mainborard when installing Gentoo on it for the first time.

    Sincerely,
    Rainer

    Thank you Rainer. We share a common understanding. I am trying to remember
    if for some reason I had disabled a couple of these flags in the past, became involved in some other problem and at the end didn't reset them.
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

    iQIzBAABCAAdFiEEXqhvaVh2ERicA8Ceseqq9sKVZxkFAmg7GwYACgkQseqq9sKV Zxk7dhAAoi467OrHYRTduz6fqvQ2SsI0HGo84f14kK4EYMkzub9CTLvkyGxm+fvC lmGT9W3uvTQQ+i+mj0qxuAvBYtACQSgWFmk1sxZiTyVOuYvsepN3N4FPH5xtwMX7 TS9+vnGeqtpEnyuYymYvS/CaDGOkQ3f+pgDetGxq0tBmfnHwFLMzyBMQopo6yWUD FsHmGI/nC4KQC9p/FW6GujVwXjOgPtU4v+secKNTbU/Ev+Xugy912tnizdfzrzm+ FO6otw/GC34LNQM2POHUxr3namoHlQDNXODoDvPBNjTqWXtydILzIhdLlTDCZgZC sf/VWF0x4sVKqFh2lHc6dceeWdTQ8E1metBd1uscTi1VilhYrtfhyHRkhZMMg62a O2CEX2NQ4ca1fSwrR8Cjayh4Er/9l9y26uOWPhoVVnihqAYFPTrC9hEQ0FI9QhQi nXu76ipGID04KMlVkT7323aYOwD/55o2nXH1MVCKGj7582BZ5JUL8n46+Pfoodb5 EALEcD47Sgr9G9OqVd0hU67BIJgtdi7I8Uywgwnoa7b2TDqhv4JiN4RKGmW4OI4G mR0zoN3hE53zT+bRN4CqRGmLhevTUzpv3696NctTEB+C14u5LSWReXs6IuQOWa3f L7BA8o9ws47X4+axCH3PV9JL7uvLqjN9IpA2PHVt6LM3ObpW5K4=
    =HiMb
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)