[mrweasel]

> That OpenBSD just never got around to implementing AVX more thoroughly?

Realistically that probably the right answer, they didn't have the developers nor did they priorities going in and just retro-actively fitting AVX in everywhere where it could potentially help with speed. The "smart choice" deliberately or not, is to not just jump onto everything new but adopt new features at a slower pace.

My reaction was towards against stuff like this:

> I get frustrated because many times OpenBSD is immune to security vulnerability simply because they don't implement modern tech advancements like AVX.

I don't get that. Sure part of it is might not getting around to implementing it, but there's also an implicit choice in not just going in and adopting new features everywhere just because you might need it. OpenBSD developers doesn't seem to have viewed AVX as being something that needed to be prioritized. Otherwise it would have been in more places.

But you're right, they do use AVX, that's clearly a mistake on my part.

[tiffanyh]

FWIW, my original post was mainly fueled by the fact that AVX was announced in 2008 and in both Intel & AMD chips by 2011.

So it’s not like AVX is a “new” development. It’s 12-years old.

(Not directing these comments at you. Just trying to expanded upon what drove my original post)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Vector_Extensions

[mrweasel]

That's honestly also a little older than I expected. It is a little weird I'll admit. It would be interesting to know if the slow adoption in OpenBSD is deliberate or done on purpose.