From: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>
Organization: SUSE Linux Products GmbH, Nuernberg, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nuernberg)
To: Ulrich Drepper <drepper@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: Why ssse3?
Date: Thu, 3 May 2007 10:52:31 +0200
User-Agent: KMail/1.9.6
Cc: Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
       Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
References: <46391392.4070706@redhat.com> <200705030046.07152.ak@suse.de> <4639171A.3050004@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <4639171A.3050004@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-15"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200705031052.31611.ak@suse.de>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 794
Lines: 20

On Thursday 03 May 2007 00:56:26 Ulrich Drepper wrote:
> Andi Kleen wrote:
> > Nope. SSE3 != SSSE3. The additional S means Supplemential.
> > 
> > It's probably because the few changes didn't justify a SSE4
> 
> OK, the problem is that the actual sse3 bit is misnamed.  According to
> Intel's docs bit 0 of ECX is "sse", the kernel uses "pni".  Too bad.

PNI (Prescott New Instructions) was the original engineering code name. Unfortunately
it was added too early before the marketing name was known and then it couldn't be 
changed anymore.

-Andi

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/