Re: Cyrix 6x86MX and Centaur C6 CPUs in 2.1.102

Rogier Wolff (R.E.Wolff@BitWizard.nl)
Fri, 22 May 1998 09:41:13 +0200 (MET DST)

James Mastros wrote:
> OTOH, Intel is the body that defines the ia32 standards. That's why the
> name is "Intel Architecture 32", not "Intel et al Architecture 32". If a
> processor's behivor deviates from that which the Intel specs specify, it is
> buggy, whether it is Intel or Cyrix or AMD or TI or Transmeta. Then again,
> if it deviates from the Intel chips on an undefined matter, or goes above
> and beyond the call of duty, then the chip is better then the Intel
> "equivlent" in that respect, and we should take advantage of those features
> as best as we can.

In this case, I think Cyrix did the right thing. They added a feature,
(powerdown the CPU as much as possible when not doing anything else).
Now they found out that the Intel specs (indirectly) say the TSC needs
to keep running. So... they made their feature an option. If your OS
isn't prepared to take the consequenses of the added feature, don't
turn it on. Simple.

Now once you turn on the useful feature, there also is a "problem"
that needs a workaround. Some people call it a bug. Whatever. Let
them.

If everybody would be nice people, nobody would try to execute an
instruction wiht a f0 0f prefix. Now there is a problem, not everybody
is nice, and you can expect your shell-users to try to crash the CPU.
So Intel CPUs have a "problem" too. Some people call it a bug.
Whatever. Let them.

Roger. 

-- 
If it's there and you can see it, it's REAL      |___R.E.Wolff@BitWizard.nl  |
If it's there and you can't see it, it's TRANSPARENT |  Tel: +31-15-2137555  |
If it's not there and you can see it, it's VIRTUAL   |__FAX:_+31-15-2138217  |
If it's not there and you can't see it, it's GONE! -- Roy Wilks, 1983  |_____|


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu