search

guberm / tortoisegit

Automatically exported from code.google.com/p/tortoisegit
0 stars 0 forks source link

Does not work on older CPU without SSE2. #1639

Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
Can you please run with debug symbols loaded?

Original issue reported on code.google.com by ur4ltz on 8 Feb 2013 at 8:08

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
[deleted comment]
GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
[deleted comment]
GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
Why even care for such processors?

Original comment by XhmikosR on 9 Feb 2013 at 9:16

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
[deleted comment]
GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
Still using Pentium III for more than 10 years? Too old to support.

Original comment by ch3co...@gmail.com on 10 Feb 2013 at 1:28

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
[deleted comment]
GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
I'm unsure if we should support older processors in x86 binaries.

Original comment by sstrickr...@googlemail.com on 10 Feb 2013 at 3:02

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
The reason is simple. VS2012 targets SSE2 processors by default.

It's about time pre SSE2 processors put to the desk.

Original comment by XhmikosR on 10 Feb 2013 at 3:51

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
And for reference  http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/7t5yh4fd.aspx

" /arch:SSE2

    Enables the use of SSE2 instructions. This is the default instruction on x86 platforms if no /arch option is specified.
"

Original comment by XhmikosR on 10 Feb 2013 at 4:13

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
So either add:
<EnableEnhancedInstructionSet 
Condition="'$(Platform)'=='Win32'">StreamingSIMDExtensions</EnableEnhancedInstru
ctionSet>

Or
<EnableEnhancedInstructionSet 
Condition="'$(Platform)'=='Win32'">None</EnableEnhancedInstructionSet>

in 
http://code.google.com/p/tortoisegit/source/browse/src/TortoiseGit.common.props

Original comment by XhmikosR on 10 Feb 2013 at 4:14

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
Issue 1641 has been merged into this issue.

Original comment by sstrickr...@googlemail.com on 10 Feb 2013 at 5:23

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
Also seeing this one on an AMD Athlon machine.

IMHO, backward compatibility is much more valuable than a likely minuscule 
performance benefit from using newer instructions on this type of application.

Thanks for your efforts on what has been a great product.

Original comment by h8g...@gmail.com on 11 Feb 2013 at 12:11

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
Anyway, support or not support?

Original comment by ch3co...@gmail.com on 11 Feb 2013 at 2:37

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
I think we should support older CPUs as we support Windows XP. However, I'm 
unsure if we should use None or StreamingSIMDExtensions for 
EnableEnhancedInstructionSet.

Original comment by sstrickr...@googlemail.com on 11 Feb 2013 at 8:35

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
SSE support:
Pentium III, Pentium III based Celeron and Athlon XP: All models
Duron: All except Model 3 (<1 GHz)

Original comment by ch3co...@gmail.com on 11 Feb 2013 at 10:41

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
what's performance differences between enable sse and disable?
If just few difference, we can support wo SSE. 
If big improve, we should enable sse to let most user get benefit of SSe

Original comment by lzn...@gmail.com on 11 Feb 2013 at 11:17

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
Keep in mind that 
http://code.google.com/p/tortoisegit/issues/detail?id=1639#c10 it should be 
"NotSet" IIRC.

Also, keep in mind that there are various processors out there that have broken 
SSE instructions. Especially some old AMD cpus. So they might say they support 
SSE but the binaries will still crash.

Original comment by XhmikosR on 12 Feb 2013 at 7:28

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
Why NotSet instead of NoExtensions?

Original comment by sstrickr...@googlemail.com on 12 Feb 2013 at 7:41

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
That is your call. I simply pointed out that "None" isn't a valid property.

Original comment by XhmikosR on 12 Feb 2013 at 7:48

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
This issue was closed by revision 639b588a0be3.

Original comment by sstrickr...@googlemail.com on 13 Feb 2013 at 9:23