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

[Linus Torvalds]

On Wed, 7 May 2008, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> 
> Indeed it wasn't, and at least I have no interest of maintaining what is in
> effect an in-kernel version of x86info(1).

Umm. We already do, since we effectively ignore what the actual hardware 
says, and replace it with our own version.

> *Certainly* I don't want anything like this crap:
> 
> > -    if (cpu_has_pat)
> > +    if (cpu_has_pat && cpu_has_pat_good)

This in fact is likely the best part of it.

Because that at least guarantees that we never say we have a good PAT when 
the hardware doesn't even report it.

As it is, we seem to just blindly override hardware. It may be correct for 
all the models we override, but still..

		Linus
--
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/