Re: RFD: Should we remove the HLT check? (was Re: [PATCH 1/8] x86:avoid check hlt if no timer interrupts)

[Arjan van de Ven]

On 5/7/2010 13:32, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> I really wish I knew the exact systems affected by the HLT bug.  If I
> remember correctly, it was some 386 systems -- or possibly 486 systems
> as well -- a very long time ago.  This test just provides a diagnosis if
> the system really is bad (it hangs with an obvious message) at the cost
> of some 40 ms to the system boot time.  I suspect C1 (HLT) being broken
> is not anywhere close to the predominant power management problem in the
> current day, and as such I'm wondering if this particular test hasn't
> outlived its usefulness.
>
> Thoughts?

we could at least hide it behind the "don't run on pentium or newer" config options..
--
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/