On 2016-02-03 1:41 PM, Bobby Holley wrote:
On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 10:32 AM, Ehsan Akhgari <ehsan.akhg...@gmail.com <mailto:ehsan.akhg...@gmail.com>> wrote: On 2016-02-03 12:50 PM, Martin Thomson wrote: On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 2:21 AM, Milan Sreckovic <msrecko...@mozilla.com <mailto:msrecko...@mozilla.com>> wrote: 99.77% of the users on all channels have SSE2 support; 51.7% of all users are on 32-bit Windows; 0.44% of all users on 32-bit Windows do not have SSE2 support. Those numbers wouldn't justify a change to me. When we make decisions about what we break with TLS by disabling something that is maybe dangerous, we try to avoid changes that break any more than 0.1% of our population. It looks like we are almost there, but unlike some of the security changes, we can't just provide motivation to change [1] because requesting a hardware change is a pretty high bar to clear. As I said elsewhere in the thread, we can just pass the correct flag to rustc to select the correct target features. Dropping support for old processors seems to be orthogonal to what Henri wants to do in rust. Except for the fact that the code he wants to replace uses dynamic SSE switching for the hot code, which seems difficult to do when dropping in a rust replacement, right?
Can't we build one file with target-features=-sse2 and one with target-features=+sse2?
_______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
