Messages in this thread | | | From | "H. Peter Anvin" <> | Subject | Re: Cyrix 6x86MX and Centaur C6 CPUs in 2.1.102 | Date | Wed, 20 May 1998 01:24:16 -0700 (PDT) |
| |
> > Also, we should take the intersection of all the capabilities in an > > SMP system. > > Good idea, but then we would need to distinguish between "capabilities" > and "incapabilities" (we should assume buggy TSC if _any_ CPU has broken > TSC, but assume MMX instructions if _all_ CPU's have MMX instructions). > What about negating all the bug bits? (I.e., having a "working TSC" flag > instead of "buggy TSC" flag.) >
Actually, I vote keeping an internal kernel capabilities word (separate from the CPUID status word). have_tsc and working_tsc can be different bits in that word. 1 should always mean that a feature is *present and functional*.
-hpa
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
| |