Messages in this thread |  | | | From | Andrew Derrick Balsa <> | | Subject | Re: [URGENT] [PATCH] 2.1.109: small patch to bugs.h | | Date | Fri, 17 Jul 1998 15:27:06 +0200 |
| |
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
|  |