Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 10 Jan 2002 09:32:01 -0800 | From | "H. Peter Anvin" <> | Subject | Re: initramfs programs (was [RFC] klibc requirements) |
| |
Dave Jones wrote:
> > It's worse than you think. > Distinguishing between XP and MP athlon for example needs > capability bit testing. (And some XP's _are_ now multiprocessor > capable, just to confuse the issue some more), so relying on > the cpuid identity string isn't foolproof. > (Also, some implementations allow for this string to be changed, > some folks have it set to "PenguinPowered" and the likes 8-) >
Sure, but if you do that you're *asking*, in a very literal way, for your CPU to misidentified. In fact, a major reason for making this string modifiable is due to certain vendors who hard-code CPUID strings in their code.
> > Asides from the above issues, multiple CPUs have the same > cpuid sometimes, meaning you have to check things like > cache size as well (though most (all?) of these should > end up with the same CONFIG_ option iirc, so this shouldn't > be an issue -- you should check to be sure though) >
Why -- if it doesn't change anything, all you're doing is making it confusing when the next derivative appears. Remember that we *do* need, as much as possible, to be forward compatible with future CPUs.
> x86info's identify.c files should give you a fairly > comprehensive guide to the various types.
-hpa
- 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/
| |