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

[H. Peter Anvin]

On 05/07/2010 03:24 PM, Alan Cox wrote:
>> I'd be cool skipping it for family 5 or newer.  I'm just wondering if we
>> should kill it completely -- IIRC it was only a handful of 386/486
>> systems which had problems, usually due to marginal power supplies which
>> couldn't handle the noise of a variable load (DOS not having any power
>> management would run at a reliable 100% load) -- that's not exactly the
>> type of systems which would have survived to modern day.
> 
> Also SMM and hardware bugs on some platforms - Cyrix MediaGX 5510 for
> example where a hlt at the wrong moment during ATA transfers hung the box
> until power cycle. But all old old stuff.

I think family < 5 seems a reasonable cutoff.

Note that the ATA transfer bug you describe above would not be caught by
the existing check.

	-hpa

--
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/