You are not logged in.

#1 2016-09-17 21:27:24

pypi
Wiki Maintainer
Registered: 2014-04-22
Posts: 250

Who doesn't have SSE2?

I've been watching a recent thread on a packaging problem created by the varying definitions of i686 with regard to SSE2 support. The post asked for some data on SSE2 support, as one of the options was upgrading the i686 packages to use SSE2 extensions by default (some do already).

I brought this up with Allan and he was in support of "upgrading" our i686
to include SSE2. Are you in favor?

I've seen the odd post around here from people who use machines that don't have SSE2, so I thought it might be useful to try to gather some rough data on the number of users without SSE2. Here are some posts I've seen somewhat recently with machines that don't support SSE2:

https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=213432 (Sempron 2400+)
https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=215988 (Pentium III)
https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=216413 (Pentium III)

According to Wikipedia, Pentium 4 or later and most AMD CPUs since 2003 support the extension.

Post if you still have such a machine and use Arch on it!

Offline

#2 2016-09-17 21:42:00

Xyne
Administrator/PM
Registered: 2008-08-03
Posts: 6,963
Website

Re: Who doesn't have SSE2?

Quick commands to show the architecture, processor model and if SSE2 is supported

uname -m; grep -m 1 'model name' /proc/cpuinfo; grep -m 1 -o sse2 /proc/cpuinfo

My Arch Linux StuffForum EtiquetteCommunity Ethos - Arch is not for everyone

Offline

#3 2016-09-19 20:59:27

qguv
Member
Registered: 2016-08-16
Posts: 3

Re: Who doesn't have SSE2?

I dug up my three i686 machines running Arch and tested them with:

grep -m 1 'model name' /proc/cpuinfo; \
grep -zoe 'sse\w*' /proc/cpuinfo | sort -z | uniq -z | tr '\0' ' '; \
uname -m

To my surprise, all of them support SSE2. The newer pair support SSE3.

  • model name      : Intel(R) Atom(TM) CPU N270   @ 1.60GHz
    sse sse2 sse3 i686 (2 machines like this)

  • model name      : Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 2.40GHz
    sse sse2 i686

Offline

#4 2016-09-19 23:22:44

TheChickenMan
Member
From: United States
Registered: 2015-07-25
Posts: 354

Re: Who doesn't have SSE2?

I wouldn't think there are many people still running much of anything important which doesn't support that. I would be more concerned with attempting to move x86_64 forward too much compared with the i686 stuff. Many of even the oldest 64bit processors are still very relevant and perfectly capable of being used for daily use. I have a couple of older machines which still get along just fine on their older Intel Core2's with 16GB of ram and SSD. A ten year old processor doesn't mean irrelevant like it used to.

My i686 running "crazy old" backup laptops do support sse2. I even think the retired P4 in the closet does as well and that thing's a dinosaur now.

uname -m; grep -m 1 'model name' /proc/cpuinfo; grep -m 1 -o sse2 /proc/cpuinfo
i686
model name	: Genuine Intel(R) CPU           T2300  @ 1.66GHz
sse2

Last edited by TheChickenMan (2016-09-19 23:25:53)


If quantum mechanics hasn't profoundly shocked you, you haven't understood it yet.
Niels Bohr

Offline

#5 2016-09-20 04:45:50

pypi
Wiki Maintainer
Registered: 2014-04-22
Posts: 250

Re: Who doesn't have SSE2?

There are a few people around on the forum who have older i686 machines (early laptops with oddball graphic cards, for example), and occasionally someone asks about i586... There are also a few older "oddball" machines around, for instance https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/a … 28311.html.
I'd agree that, in general, most people don't actively use these machines...

If this thread sits around for long enough and nobody replies it is probably safe to say that the fraction of users with hardware that old is extremely small (as in, nonexistent); that in itself would be a reasonable outcome.

Offline

#6 2016-09-20 08:08:42

ngoonee
Forum Fellow
From: Between Thailand and Singapore
Registered: 2009-03-17
Posts: 7,354

Re: Who doesn't have SSE2?

pypi wrote:

If this thread sits around for long enough and nobody replies it is probably safe to say that the fraction of users with hardware that old is extremely small (as in, nonexistent); that in itself would be a reasonable outcome.

The proportion of Arch users who use the forums is fairly small. The proportion of those who actually keep track of all posts (either through 'new' or through manual browsing) is extremely small (as in, nonexistent).

Doubt you can draw conclusions that way. The mailing list has more response (not necessarily more users) simply because of the format. Even then I would not draw any conclusions regarding Arch's user-base from that.

Fortunately, the decision isn't being made based on any concern for the size of (or lack of) the userbase.


Allan-Volunteer on the (topic being discussed) mailn lists. You never get the people who matters attention on the forums.
jasonwryan-Installing Arch is a measure of your literacy. Maintaining Arch is a measure of your diligence. Contributing to Arch is a measure of your competence.
Griemak-Bleeding edge, not bleeding flat. Edge denotes falls will occur from time to time. Bring your own parachute.

Offline

#7 2016-09-20 10:02:50

R00KIE
Forum Fellow
From: Between a computer and a chair
Registered: 2008-09-14
Posts: 4,734

Re: Who doesn't have SSE2?

@qguv
I'm not sure where you got sse3 from, but if I had to guess I would say bad grep options or you are not using Arch's kernel because sse3 just like that is not one of the flags.

To check for sse3 you have to look for the pni flag. You could also use this package[1] from the AUR, it provide all the info you can possibly need.

[1] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/cpuid/


R00KIE
Tm90aGluZyB0byBzZWUgaGVyZSwgbW92ZSBhbG9uZy4K

Offline

#8 2016-09-21 07:13:12

nadley
Member
Registered: 2014-09-01
Posts: 7

Re: Who doesn't have SSE2?

This might not be relevant, but I use a PC Engines Alix 2d13 (http://www.pcengines.ch/alix2d13.htm) as a router/firewall. This model is still being sold and has an AMD Geode LX800 CPU, which as far I understand is i686-compatible but doesn't have SSE2 support.

However, since it also doesn't have the NOPL instruction (which is not part of Intel's i686 specification, but has become part of the de facto standard), Linux identifies it as a i586. I have been running arch on it for several years, but since a couple of weeks ago mkinitcpio checks for i686 and refuses to run on this machine. I just remove this check and arch continues to run fine on it.

Offline

#9 2016-09-22 13:00:32

qguv
Member
Registered: 2016-08-16
Posts: 3

Re: Who doesn't have SSE2?

R00KIE wrote:

I'm not sure where you got sse3 from, but if I had to guess I would say bad grep options or you are not using Arch's kernel because sse3 just like that is not one of the flags.

To check for sse3 you have to look for the pni flag.

You're right, it looks like I found a substring of ssse3. pni is present too though.

$ grep -e 'flags' /proc/cpuinfo
flags           : fpu vme de tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm pbe nx constant_tsc arch_perfmon pebs bts aperfmperf eagerfpu pni dtes64 monitor ds_cpl est tm2 ssse3 xtpr pdcm movbe lahf_lm dtherm
flags           : fpu vme de tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm pbe nx constant_tsc arch_perfmon pebs bts aperfmperf eagerfpu pni dtes64 monitor ds_cpl est tm2 ssse3 xtpr pdcm movbe lahf_lm dtherm
ngoonee wrote:

The proportion of Arch users who use the forums is fairly small. The proportion of those who actually keep track of all posts (either through 'new' or through manual browsing) is extremely small (as in, nonexistent).

Doubt you can draw conclusions that way. The mailing list has more response (not necessarily more users) simply because of the format. Even then I would not draw any conclusions regarding Arch's user-base from that.

Fortunately, the decision isn't being made based on any concern for the size of (or lack of) the userbase.

Right, if Arch decides to stop supporting SSE2 to keep the reward:effort ratio high, fine. But I'd be reluctant to drop support for a subset of users without good data (pkgstats) about how many would be affected. If there's some hidden active  20% of the community that use machines that don't support SSE2 but who don't use the forums, I wouldn't want them to wake up one day and find their distribution dead to them.

We could use this issue to gather more pkgstats data. Maybe we could have a news article that promotes its use?

Offline

#10 2016-09-22 15:05:46

ngoonee
Forum Fellow
From: Between Thailand and Singapore
Registered: 2009-03-17
Posts: 7,354

Re: Who doesn't have SSE2?

qguv wrote:

If there's some hidden active  20% of the community that use machines that don't support SSE2 but who don't use the forums, I wouldn't want them to wake up one day and find their distribution dead to them.

If this 'hidden' users don't use the forums or the mailing lists, the likelihood that their staying or leaving will affect Arch is close to nil. Like any open source project Arch is primarily built on (and sustained by) those who contribute to it. 'Users' are welcome, but in a practical sense disposable.


Allan-Volunteer on the (topic being discussed) mailn lists. You never get the people who matters attention on the forums.
jasonwryan-Installing Arch is a measure of your literacy. Maintaining Arch is a measure of your diligence. Contributing to Arch is a measure of your competence.
Griemak-Bleeding edge, not bleeding flat. Edge denotes falls will occur from time to time. Bring your own parachute.

Offline

#11 2016-12-04 13:22:56

Pineman13
Member
Registered: 2016-12-04
Posts: 26

Re: Who doesn't have SSE2?

ngoonee wrote:

If this 'hidden' users don't use the forums or the mailing lists, the likelihood that their staying or leaving will affect Arch is close to nil. Like any open source project Arch is primarily built on (and sustained by) those who contribute to it. 'Users' are welcome, but in a practical sense disposable.

But should we regard a part of the community as a non-existent, simply because they stay silent?
And furthermore, one can easily be a wiki contributor or even a small-scale AUR maintainer without even having a forum account.
Alas, the problem risen should be regarded as a natural case of aggravation within the community, where a part of it for one or another reason stays utterly conservative.

And this is where the reasons behind their motivation should be questioned: is it just a case of personal choice? Or perhaps it
is the lack of possibility that forces them to seemingly resent progress?
Where in turn the question of finance arises...

The place where I come from is not regarded as the third world country, but neither it is a developed county, especially when it comes down to IT and it's produce. And yet even here I can easily afford to get a used SSE2-capable netbook for just under 70 USD. And I verily doubt that there's a lot of people who can not afford to pay 70$ for a laptop.
Although I have never been to a third world country. Perhaps it is troublesome for them to gather such a sum of money after all. Another problem is that such devices are usually subjected to mechanical damage due to poor treatment and age, as well as poor battery capacity up to the point of a complete inability to power a laptop.

And those symptoms tend to be even more pronounced in the third world countries. Which begs the question: are we truly entitled to take it away from them and force even more struggle upon those people?

I had learned to appreciate what those, supposedly 'less enlightened' people, are able to do with their free time. 'Especially
when I get to compare those to the people of my country.
So perhaps we could give them some more time, even while being one of the most up-to-date distros?

Offline

#12 2016-12-04 14:43:23

Trilby
Inspector Parrot
Registered: 2011-11-29
Posts: 29,442
Website

Re: Who doesn't have SSE2?

Pineman13 wrote:

But should we regard a part of the community as a non-existent, simply because they stay silent?

I don't think we should.

As for the rest of your post, I'm not sure how you make the link to political conservatism and finances.  This reads more like a personal political rant than a response to the issue at hand.  These views are irrelevant to the topic and misplaced on a technical forum.

Note, this thread was breifly closed as some excerpts of the previous post seemed like potential political spam.  On review it seems more likely to have been an honest response that just strayed a bit far from the topic.  I note this however as any continuance of such a stray will lead this thread strait to the dustbin.


"UNIX is simple and coherent..." - Dennis Ritchie, "GNU's Not UNIX" -  Richard Stallman

Offline

#13 2016-12-04 15:09:27

eschwartz
Fellow
Registered: 2014-08-08
Posts: 4,097

Re: Who doesn't have SSE2?

Pineman13 wrote:
ngoonee wrote:

If this 'hidden' users don't use the forums or the mailing lists, the likelihood that their staying or leaving will affect Arch is close to nil. Like any open source project Arch is primarily built on (and sustained by) those who contribute to it. 'Users' are welcome, but in a practical sense disposable.

But should we regard a part of the community as a non-existent, simply because they stay silent?
And furthermore, one can easily be a wiki contributor or even a small-scale AUR maintainer without even having a forum account.
Alas, the problem risen should be regarded as a natural case of aggravation within the community, where a part of it for one or another reason stays utterly conservative.

If they stay silent, there is no way to distinguish between their silence and their non-existence. So yes, they will (continue to) be ignored.
If you don't have a forum account, then you should at least subscribe to the mailing list. Even if you don't typically post, at least you will have an idea of what is going on around you.

Someone who is completely oblivious to the community discussion is quite obviously okay with not being factored into discussions about policy or anything else.


Managing AUR repos The Right Way -- aurpublish (now a standalone tool)

Offline

#14 2016-12-06 22:53:08

Brcher
Member
Registered: 2011-06-20
Posts: 36

Re: Who doesn't have SSE2?

Pretty sure all my machines support AVX2, haha, so I'd say go for it. Do desktop applications get much benefit from these sort of SIMD instructions, though? I thought they were mostly just for compute applications. Does weston have some nice crunchy matrix multiplications or something?

Offline

#15 2016-12-07 06:06:12

Jristz
Member
From: America/Santiago
Registered: 2011-06-11
Posts: 1,022

Re: Who doesn't have SSE2?

I think we just could wait to 2038 to drop i686 and even keep the i686 as generic since otherwise is not even i686 but more like i786.

as for sse2 until like one year ago my laptop not support it but now I use a new machine but yea was costly since even with a "hight" minimal wage that not mean the rest of the stuff is low price.


Well, I suppose that this is somekind of signature, no?

Offline

#16 2017-01-25 19:25:00

Brcher
Member
Registered: 2011-06-20
Posts: 36

Re: Who doesn't have SSE2?

Looks like imminent phase out of i686 has been announced on the mailing list. Well done! SSE2 is part of the x86 64 standard, right? Progress!

Offline

#17 2017-01-26 10:52:30

F1y3r
Member
Registered: 2007-09-28
Posts: 61

Re: Who doesn't have SSE2?

My i686 non-sse2 router/firewall is running Arch so well that I haven't been on the forums for well over a year now. Hopefully community will keep i686 (non-sse2) alive.

Offline

#18 2017-02-04 15:18:32

regid
Member
Registered: 2016-06-06
Posts: 201

Re: Who doesn't have SSE2?

At the time of this writing, I don't have arch on a machine with only SSE, not the more advanced SSE instructions.
I am using such a machine though, I think it has 1.8GHZ Mobile Athlon XP-M 2400+ Processor (AMD). I do have arch on a machine of similar age, which does have SSE2. I an writing here because I am troubled that open source software seem to drop support for old machines like mine. Can't a main library, say libc, record to itself the abilities of the processor it is running on, and use that information? Or whatever better solution can be found to keep software running on such machines.


powerofforreboot.efi (AUR): Utilities to be used from within a UEFI boot manager or shell.

Offline

#19 2017-02-04 16:11:00

Lone_Wolf
Member
From: Netherlands, Europe
Registered: 2005-10-04
Posts: 11,868

Re: Who doesn't have SSE2?

The main problem is that languages make different binaries depending on processor capabilities.
An sse2-enabled binary will fail to run on a processor without sse2 capabilities.

When Apple swtiched from powerpc machines to intel x86 machines, some people (including me) thought their Universal Binaries had solved this problem.

Unfortunately apple hadn't solved the problem , their Universal binaries just included 2 versions of the binary : one compiled for powerpc and one for x86.

linux doesn't have a UB concept, so separate binaries is the way we go.


Disliking systemd intensely, but not satisfied with alternatives so focusing on taming systemd.


(A works at time B)  && (time C > time B ) ≠  (A works at time C)

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB