lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Jul]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: TSCs are a no-no on i386
On Wed, 2003-07-30 20:10:06 +0200, Adrian Bunk <bunk@fs.tum.de>
wrote in message <20030730181006.GB21734@fs.tum.de>:
> On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 03:56:23PM +0200, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote:
> >...
> > Please apply. Worst to say, even Debian seems to start using i486+
> > features (ie. libstdc++5 is SIGILLed on Am386 because there's no
> > "lock" insn available)...
>
> Shouldn't the 486 emulation in the latest 386 kernel images in Debian
> unstable take care of this?

Specifically patched kernel? Sounds lame to me...

Generic solution would be to have a generic implementation, IMHO.
Up to now, I've nowhere found some hard facts that the new opcodes do
measureable speed up things. Sure, saving some hundreds/thousands/...
CPU cycles is nice - but not, if that's only 0.1% of the whole number of
CPU cycles burned in a run. That doesn't, IMHO, really legitimate do
unsupport the i386.

MfG, JBG

--
Jan-Benedict Glaw jbglaw@lug-owl.de . +49-172-7608481
"Eine Freie Meinung in einem Freien Kopf | Gegen Zensur | Gegen Krieg
fuer einen Freien Staat voll Freier Bürger" | im Internet! | im Irak!
ret = do_actions((curr | FREE_SPEECH) & ~(IRAQ_WAR_2 | DRM | TCPA));
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:47    [W:0.127 / U:3.248 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site