[gentoo-dev] mmxext flag

[gentoo-dev] mmxext flag

[David Holm]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 321 bytes --]

Hi,
I noticed that a new MMX flag has been added, mmxext
(media-video/mplayer-1.0_pre6-r2). Please add it to
profiles/default-linux/use.mask and then unmask it on available
platforms. Right now it's unmasked on all platforms which I assume is
not what we want.

Isn't mmxext the same as mmx2 btw?

//David Holm

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] mmxext flag

[Drake Wyrm]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 557 bytes --]

At 2005-03-21T09:19:53+0100, David Holm <dholm@gentoo.org> wrote:
> Isn't mmxext the same as mmx2 btw?

Basically, yeah. "MMX2" is the trade name for the "mmxext" instruction
set. Or "mmxext" is the flag that indicates the presence of the "MMX2"
instruction set. However you want to look at it.

Either way, if you want an authoritative source as to which to use, I'd
suggest /proc/cpuinfo.

-- 
Batou: Hey, Major... You ever hear of "human rights"?
Kusanagi: I understand the concept, but I've never seen it in action.
  --Ghost in the Shell

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] mmxext flag

[Drake Wyrm]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 557 bytes --]

At 2005-03-21T09:19:53+0100, David Holm <dholm@gentoo.org> wrote:
> Isn't mmxext the same as mmx2 btw?

Basically, yeah. "MMX2" is the trade name for the "mmxext" instruction
set. Or "mmxext" is the flag that indicates the presence of the "MMX2"
instruction set. However you want to look at it.

Either way, if you want an authoritative source as to which to use, I'd
suggest /proc/cpuinfo.

-- 
Batou: Hey, Major... You ever hear of "human rights"?
Kusanagi: I understand the concept, but I've never seen it in action.
  --Ghost in the Shell

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

[gentoo-dev] Re: mmxext flag

[Ryan Hill]

Drake Wyrm <wyrm <at> haell.com> writes:

> 
> At 2005-03-21T09:19:53+0100, David Holm <dholm <at> gentoo.org> wrote:
> > Isn't mmxext the same as mmx2 btw?
> 
> Basically, yeah. "MMX2" is the trade name for the "mmxext" instruction
> set. Or "mmxext" is the flag that indicates the presence of the "MMX2"
> instruction set. However you want to look at it.
> 
> Either way, if you want an authoritative source as to which to use, I'd
> suggest /proc/cpuinfo.
> 

MMX2 is supported by Pentium 3 Katmai and Coppermine processors.  MMXEXT is
supported by Athlon processors.  As far as I can tell they're two very different
things.  I'm confused.

http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-310794-highlight-mmxext.html


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: mmxext flag

[Drake Wyrm]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1868 bytes --]

At 2005-03-21T21:19:21+0000, Ryan Hill <deemkay@gmail.com> wrote:
> Drake Wyrm <wyrm <at> haell.com> writes:
> > At 2005-03-21T09:19:53+0100, David Holm <dholm <at> gentoo.org>
> > wrote:
> > > Isn't mmxext the same as mmx2 btw?
> > 
> > Basically, yeah. "MMX2" is the trade name for the "mmxext"
> > instruction set. Or "mmxext" is the flag that indicates the presence
> > of the "MMX2" instruction set. However you want to look at it.
> > 
> > Either way, if you want an authoritative source as to which to use,
> > I'd suggest /proc/cpuinfo.
> > 
> 
> MMX2 is supported by Pentium 3 Katmai and Coppermine processors.
> MMXEXT is supported by Athlon processors.  As far as I can tell
> they're two very different things.  I'm confused.

You, and a lot of other people.

Also, I should correct my earlier statement. "MMX2" is _a_ marketing
name for the "Extensions to the MMX Instruction Set", which were
apparently introduced in the AMD-K6-2E+ and AMD-K6-IIIE+. You're right,
though; the Athlon was the first mainline processor with mmx(2|ext).
These extensions were subsequently adopted by Intel into the Pentium II
much in the same way AMD adopted Intel's original MultiMedia eXtensions.

In my further research on the subject, it looks like Intel has been of
late bragging up it's whiz-bang new "Intel Wireless MMX2 Technology".
It's apparently an instruction set extension targeted at all-in-one
cell-phone-camera-music-player-PDA gadgets. As far as I can tell, it's
the only time Intel has used the term "MMX2".

Therefore, I recommend the use of "mmxext" to refer to the original
multimedia extensions extensions, to avoid aggravating an
already-confusing situation.

-- 
Batou: Hey, Major... You ever hear of "human rights"?
Kusanagi: I understand the concept, but I've never seen it in action.
  --Ghost in the Shell

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: mmxext flag

[Drake Wyrm]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1868 bytes --]

At 2005-03-21T21:19:21+0000, Ryan Hill <deemkay@gmail.com> wrote:
> Drake Wyrm <wyrm <at> haell.com> writes:
> > At 2005-03-21T09:19:53+0100, David Holm <dholm <at> gentoo.org>
> > wrote:
> > > Isn't mmxext the same as mmx2 btw?
> > 
> > Basically, yeah. "MMX2" is the trade name for the "mmxext"
> > instruction set. Or "mmxext" is the flag that indicates the presence
> > of the "MMX2" instruction set. However you want to look at it.
> > 
> > Either way, if you want an authoritative source as to which to use,
> > I'd suggest /proc/cpuinfo.
> > 
> 
> MMX2 is supported by Pentium 3 Katmai and Coppermine processors.
> MMXEXT is supported by Athlon processors.  As far as I can tell
> they're two very different things.  I'm confused.

You, and a lot of other people.

Also, I should correct my earlier statement. "MMX2" is _a_ marketing
name for the "Extensions to the MMX Instruction Set", which were
apparently introduced in the AMD-K6-2E+ and AMD-K6-IIIE+. You're right,
though; the Athlon was the first mainline processor with mmx(2|ext).
These extensions were subsequently adopted by Intel into the Pentium II
much in the same way AMD adopted Intel's original MultiMedia eXtensions.

In my further research on the subject, it looks like Intel has been of
late bragging up it's whiz-bang new "Intel Wireless MMX2 Technology".
It's apparently an instruction set extension targeted at all-in-one
cell-phone-camera-music-player-PDA gadgets. As far as I can tell, it's
the only time Intel has used the term "MMX2".

Therefore, I recommend the use of "mmxext" to refer to the original
multimedia extensions extensions, to avoid aggravating an
already-confusing situation.

-- 
Batou: Hey, Major... You ever hear of "human rights"?
Kusanagi: I understand the concept, but I've never seen it in action.
  --Ghost in the Shell

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

[gentoo-dev] Re: mmxext flag

[Ryan Hill]

Drake Wyrm <wyrm <at> haell.com> writes:

> > MMX2 is supported by Pentium 3 Katmai and Coppermine processors.
> > MMXEXT is supported by Athlon processors.  As far as I can tell
> > they're two very different things.  I'm confused.
> 
> You, and a lot of other people.
> 
> Also, I should correct my earlier statement. "MMX2" is _a_ marketing
> name for the "Extensions to the MMX Instruction Set", which were
> apparently introduced in the AMD-K6-2E+ and AMD-K6-IIIE+. You're right,
> though; the Athlon was the first mainline processor with mmx(2|ext).
> These extensions were subsequently adopted by Intel into the Pentium II
> much in the same way AMD adopted Intel's original MultiMedia eXtensions.
> 
> In my further research on the subject, it looks like Intel has been of
> late bragging up it's whiz-bang new "Intel Wireless MMX2 Technology".
> It's apparently an instruction set extension targeted at all-in-one
> cell-phone-camera-music-player-PDA gadgets. As far as I can tell, it's
> the only time Intel has used the term "MMX2".
> 
> Therefore, I recommend the use of "mmxext" to refer to the original
> multimedia extensions extensions, to avoid aggravating an
> already-confusing situation.

thanks, that makes things a little less murky.  i see that back in 98-99,
everyone was buzzing about the new KNI/MMX2 instruction set, but all references
to it seem to have disappeared when it was released.  the thing that confuses me
most is that MPlayer insists i have MMX2 support.  now that its flag has changed
to mmxext i find it strange that to enable MMX2 support for an Intel chip, I
have to enable support for an Athlon specific technology (at least that's the
only references i could find indicate).

but this is all semantics anyways.  thanks for the prompt reply.

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list