Re: missing mxcsr initialization

From: Alan Cox (alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk)
Date: Fri Oct 27 2000 - 06:42:03 EST


> Go back. Read ym email. Realize that you do this ONCE. At setup time.

(I've got about 2000 to read after this jaunt so I may have missed some)

> You can even split SEP into SEPOLD and SEPNEW, and _always_ just test one
> bit. You should not have to test stepping levels in normal use: that
> invariably causes problems when there are more than one CPU that has some
> feature.

Agree

> if (vendor == intel && stepping < 5) {
> ...
> }
>
> and it appears to work again, until it turns out that Cyrix has the same
> issue, and then it ends up being the test from hell, where different
> vendor tests all clash, and it gets increasingly difficult to add a new
> thing later on sanely.

And you end up with mtrr.c

> No thank you. We'll just require fixed feature flags. Which can be turned
> on as the features are enabled.

That seems sensible

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



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Oct 31 2000 - 21:00:20 EST