From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261905AbVFGP34 (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Jun 2005 11:29:56 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261915AbVFGP1b (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Jun 2005 11:27:31 -0400 Received: from prgy-npn1.prodigy.com ([207.115.54.37]:23305 "EHLO oddball.prodigy.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261907AbVFGPEz (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Jun 2005 11:04:55 -0400 Message-ID: <42A5B80A.4040709@tmr.com> Date: Tue, 07 Jun 2005 11:06:50 -0400 From: Bill Davidsen User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.6) Gecko/20050319 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Pentium-D support Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Since this is really a question in several areas I'll put it here. Now that the Pentium-D processors are available at reasonable prices and for quick delivery, can anyone speak to the ACPI issues? The available boards use the 945 and 955 chipset. Is there any reason to think that the scheduler would get confused by the CPU, such as thinking it was HT or some such? The specs indicate that 64 bit is supported, is there any actualy Linux support for the Intel 64 bit stuff in gcc and the kernel? One of the people I work with reports that the distro he runs on his Athlon64 lock solid after reading the boot sector, so obviously this isn't Athlon compatable. The price is lower than a dual Xeon setup if you have an application which needs SMP, and initial power values make it look like a lower power solution overall. -- -bill davidsen (davidsen@tmr.com) "The secret to procrastination is to put things off until the last possible moment - but no longer" -me