Re: Cyrix 6x86MX and Centaur C6 CPUs in 2.1.102

=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Andr=E9?= Derrick Balsa (
Wed, 20 May 1998 17:07:11 -0100

Hi Martin,

Martin Mares wrote:
> I didn't implement it in the original CPU detection code as it seemed very
> hairy to me and I didn't like to substantially enlarge the code by lots of
> weird stepping naming conversions.
> Anyway, just send me a patch :-)

Please check 2.0.34pre7. I has my patch for the Cyrix chips, and a
similar algorithm can be used for the AMD K5/K6 and the Centaur C6. It
"enlarges" the kernel executable by about 100 bytes, the source by a
dozen lines of code.
> > d) Also bug reporting in /proc/cpuinfo. Everytime I see reported that my
> > 6x86(L,MX) or K6 machines don't have the F00F bug, I wonder what use is
> > there to report a bug that simply is _not_ there and couldn't be. This
> > also confuses most Linux users.
> Actually, this would be a bit confusing as you won't have any way to
> distinguish between "this CPU cannot have this bug" and "this kernel doesn't
> detect this bug".

/proc/cpuinfo is supposed to report CPU information, not kernel
bug-detection capabilities, IMNSHO. A normal Linux user with a non-Intel
x86 would prefer to see a "clean" cpuinfo, without all the Intel-only
bugs. Kernel bug-detection capabilities could be listed on another

BTW TSC calibration in the setup code would allow showing MHz rating in
/proc/cpuinfo, so people would stop wondering why they get bogomips such
and such everytime a new x86 processor comes out.

André Balsa

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to