[lkml]   [1998]   [Oct]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Cyrix Detection -- NO SMP, please ?????
On Sun, 18 Oct 1998, Gregory Maxwell wrote:

> > Performance issue is completely other story. Do you have util which is able to
> > find existence of second CPU when UP kernel is loaded ? Otherwise we should
> > use SMP kernel for installation CD (bootable of course :-) and this CD must
> > work for MOST users.
> It would probably to possible to port the kernels CPU detection routienes
> to 16bit code and put them in lilo so that you could to config it to run
> the right kernel.
> Even if porting to 16bit is too tough it should be trivial to port it to
> userspace so an install util (or later, a reconfig util) can pick the
> right one.

Can you point for such a util? It's not imperative to boot installation with
SMP kernel. And yes, we can have two kernels in distro. But we have to have
a way to make a decision which one should get installed. It's possible to
ask a user for a choice, but it's pretty wrong approach. The problem does
not exist provided I do have a function which returns the type of system (UP
or SMP) when called from under the UP kernel. It haven't to be 16bit 'coz
it'll be called from the installation program fired off the UP kernel.

> The dists should be shipping two sets of kernels. Both with PPRO opt
> turned on and MTRR support. This leaves out the i386. SO? What the hell
> are you doing Running RedHat 5.5 w/ a 2.2 kernel on a i386?!? PPro opt
> will work on i486+. MTRR support must be on w/ PPRO+ SMP because some MBs
> dont set MTRRs correctly on both CPUs..

i386 have almost become a history. May be I'm wrong, but I don't see any
sense to run kernels on i386. The entry level is i486.

> Zero reboot install. What you say? It cant be done? But it can.. You use
> the same kernel on the boot disk as the mail system and you act as if the
> whole install was just an initrd.. I'm dieing for RH to do this on their
> installs: Can you imagine it.. "My new NT5 only required 3 reboots to be
> configured as a Webserver. HA My RH Linux 5.5 needed ZERO".

It's doable, but impractical. You have to have a possibility to retrieve an
installation media from the machine and make sure it'll boot off the media
it have been installed onto. So you need exactly one reboot.

> > GM> No there should be seperate SMP and UP kernels. Do you think that x86 and
> > GM> Alpha should run from the same kernel binary?
> >
> > This will be great but it's almost impossible to do :-((
> :) I know how to do it. You enhance the boot loaded so it can boot a 'fat'
> kernel. (i.e. all the ARCHS catted togeather) The same would work for SMP.
> I'm not so sure I want 100megs of my HDD eaten up by a fat kernel and fat
> modules.

It's nuts. Sure you can boot a fat kernel, but you'll have several sets of
packages for different archs to fit into one CD. Remember, the goal is not
to boot a kernel but to install and fire up the system.

Serguei Koubouchine aka the Tamer < > The impossible we do immediately.
e-mail: SK320-RIPE < > Miracles require 24-hour notice.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:45    [W:0.143 / U:0.804 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site