Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 8 Sep 2008 09:59:14 -0700 (PDT) | From | Linus Torvalds <> | Subject | Re: [BUG] x86 kenel won't boot under Virtual PC |
| |
On Mon, 8 Sep 2008, david@lang.hm wrote: > > I always understood the CPU selection to be "this CPU and ones compatible with > it will work, others won't" unless generic was enabled.
No.
Read the help text..
Yes, we care about features that MATTER. But if compiles start using features that don't really matter, and make a specific kernel _too_ specific, then we need to reign in the madness.
IOW, it's a balance. On one hand, yes, the uarch makes sense. On the other, it's just stupid to have to worry about details that don't realistically make any difference at all - except whether the machine works or not.
And yes, we could just put this up as a Virtual PC bug. It clearly is. But in the end, it _still_ all boils down to a balance between "do we actually win anything by using NOPL statically" vs "do we lose anything by being too damn inconvenient".
Linus
| |