lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1998]   [Jul]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [URGENT] [PATCH] 2.1.109: small patch to bugs.h
Date
Hi Pete,

On Fri, 17 Jul 1998, Pete Clements wrote:
>>
> > Please Pete, could you test this out on your Intel 486 DX2-66?
....
>Patch applied, works, back to pre 109.
>Patched 2.1.109 /proc/cpuinfo

>processor : 0
>cpu family : 4
>model : unknown
>vendor_id : unknown
>stepping : unknown
....

OK, I fixed the Cyrix code, now the problem is in the Intel code.

Unfortunately, I can't offer a fix for this, since I only have and work on the
2.0.3x sources. Rafael and I maintain a common code base for the Cyrix detection
routines, so the Cyrix fix was easy, but I don't have the least idea of how
Intel detection is done in 2.1.109. AFAIK it's completely different from the
2.0.3x code.

[BTW this is why I think it's a good idea to have as much common code as
possible in the 2.0.3x and 2.1.10x kernels, at least for code that's been well
exercised]

If you can wait until Rafael comes online, I am pretty sure he can cook
something up in a clean way. It's probably something relatively simple, like
the default vendor_id not being initialized ot something like that. I am
positive that the problem is restricted to setup.c.

Now I understand why Linus calls the CPU detection code a "beauty wart". Do you
realize how much time women spend painting themselves? ;-)

Cheers,
---------------------
Andrew D. Balsa
andrebalsa@altern.org

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

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:43    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site