On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 09:25:53PM -0400, Fernando Rodriguez wrote > I guess gcc devs are careful when using the model numbers (Intel > lists 3 for Atoms, gcc uses only two so that may account for the > models I mentioned) but the chance of error is there. The -mno-xxx > flags would safeguard against it.
I have one of the earliest Atom chips. Some people have a hard time believing this, but it's a 32-bit-only chip; a couple of lines from /proc/cpuinfo model name : Intel(R) Atom(TM) CPU Z520 @ 1.33GHz address sizes : 32 bits physical, 32 bits virtual Intel gives the CPU's specs at... http://ark.intel.com/products/35466/Intel-Atom-Processor-Z520-512K-Cache-1_33-GHz-533-MHz-FSB ...where it specifically says... Intel 64 # No I want to make absolutely certain that "illegal instructions" are not compiled for it. -- Walter Dnes <waltd...@waltdnes.org> I don't run "desktop environments"; I run useful applications
