Re: [PATCH] x86: introduce a new Linux defined feature flag for PATsupport

[H. Peter Anvin]

Alan Cox wrote:
> > For old CPUs it is actually ok (after all they worked for years without
> > PAT), I just don't like it for new CPUs. It's a bad idea there and
> > in the x86 world it is a reasonable expectation that CPU features
> > generally work.
>
> Agreed 100%. We should default to assuming newer processors work. That
> will be true in almost if not all cases anyway, and since it'll bite
> anyone at Intel/AMD/.. testing new CPU steppings when it is on by default
> any problem cases won't be leaving the labs.

Yes, capping the upper end is an actively bad thing, because it can 
actually *make* bugs appear (by artifically limiting testing by CPU houses.)

	-hpa

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