Re: UP APIC reenabling vs. cpu type detection ordering
H. Peter Anvin (hpa@transmeta.com)
Wed, 07 Feb 2001 09:43:21 -0800
Mikael Pettersson wrote:
>
> > In other words, I'd like to see a reason for making any vendor-specific
> > determinations, and if so, they should ideally be centralized to the CPU
> > feature-determination code.
>
> The Pentium 4 has a local APIC. It's not 100% compatible with the P6, and
> you sometimes have to know which one you're poking. CPUID returns the
> APIC feature bit. Should we mask its APIC capability? Of course not.
>
What's so "of course" about it? It mostly depends on how ugly the
determination is.
-hpa
--
<hpa@transmeta.com> at work, <hpa@zytor.com> in private!
"Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot."
http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/puzzle.txt
-
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/