lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2000]   [Oct]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: missing mxcsr initialization
Date
From
> Go back. Read ym email. Realize that you do this ONCE. At setup time.

(I've got about 2000 to read after this jaunt so I may have missed some)

> You can even split SEP into SEPOLD and SEPNEW, and _always_ just test one
> bit. You should not have to test stepping levels in normal use: that
> invariably causes problems when there are more than one CPU that has some
> feature.

Agree

> if (vendor == intel && stepping < 5) {
> ...
> }
>
> and it appears to work again, until it turns out that Cyrix has the same
> issue, and then it ends up being the test from hell, where different
> vendor tests all clash, and it gets increasingly difficult to add a new
> thing later on sanely.

And you end up with mtrr.c

> No thank you. We'll just require fixed feature flags. Which can be turned
> on as the features are enabled.

That seems sensible

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:44    [W:0.049 / U:3.368 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site