![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Arjan van de Ven wrote: > Zhang, Yanmin wrote: > >> If it's a single processor, the go backwards issue doesn't exist. >> Below is >> my patch based on Arjan's. It's against 2.6.19-rc5-mm2. > > Hi, > > this patch is incorrect > >> --- linux-2.6.19-rc5-mm2_arjan/arch/x86_64/kernel/setup.c >> 2006-11-29 10:41:21.000000000 +0800 >> +++ linux-2.6.19-rc5-mm2_arjan_fix/arch/x86_64/kernel/setup.c >> 2006-11-29 10:42:28.000000000 +0800 >> @@ -861,7 +861,7 @@ static void __cpuinit init_intel(struct >> set_bit(X86_FEATURE_CONSTANT_TSC, &c->x86_capability); >> if (c->x86 == 6) >> set_bit(X86_FEATURE_REP_GOOD, &c->x86_capability); >> - if (c->x86 == 15) >> + if (c->x86 == 15 && num_possible_cpus() != 1) >> set_bit(X86_FEATURE_SYNC_RDTSC, &c->x86_capability); > > > first of all, you probably meant "|| num_possible_cpus() == 1" > > but second of all, the core2 cpus are dual core so.. .what does it bring > you at all? I guess you could boot with a UP kernel or maxcpus=1? -- SUSE Labs, Novell Inc. Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2006-11-29 08:09 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||