Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 20 May 1998 16:09:38 +0200 | From | Martin Mares <> | Subject | Re: Cyrix 6x86MX and Centaur C6 CPUs in 2.1.102 |
| |
Hello,
> c) The code that shows Cyrix CPU steppings does not conform to Cyrix > stepping numbering. 6x86MX steppings are documented as 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, > 1.6, etc... in both the Cyrix/NS and IBM documentation, _not_ 0.3, 0.4, > 0.5, 0.6 as the present Linux kernel code would have it. > > A similar mistake is done for K6 steppings, which in the AMD > documentation are described as steppings A, B, C. > > This causes confusion with users that do "cat /proc/cpuinfo" and can't > figure out what CPU stepping they have. So I wish you could get it > right.
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 :-)
> 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".
Have a nice fortnight -- Martin `MJ' Mares <mj@ucw.cz> http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~mj/ Faculty of Math and Physics, Charles University, Prague, Czech Rep., Earth "All computers run at the same speed... with the power off."
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
| |