Re: initramfs programs (was [RFC] klibc requirements)

["H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>]

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