From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 30 May 2002 20:36:22 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 30 May 2002 20:36:21 -0400 Received: from jalon.able.es ([212.97.163.2]:2760 "EHLO jalon.able.es") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 30 May 2002 20:36:21 -0400 Date: Fri, 31 May 2002 02:36:15 +0200 From: "J.A. Magallon" To: Dave Jones Cc: Jeff Garzik , "J.A. Magallon" , Lista Linux-Kernel Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86 cpu selection (first hack) Message-ID: <20020531003615.GA13206@werewolf.able.es> In-Reply-To: <20020530225015.GA1829@werewolf.able.es> <3CF6B3AD.6010106@mandrakesoft.com> <20020531014224.C9282@suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT X-Mailer: Balsa 1.3.6 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2002.05.31 Dave Jones wrote: >On Thu, May 30, 2002 at 07:20:13PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote: > > > wonder if making the CPU features selectable is useful? i.e. provide an > > actual config option for MMX memcpy, F00F bug, WP, etc. Normal (current) > > logic is to look at the cpu selected, and deduce these options. > >J.A's comment that most people compiling kernels shouldn't need to know >what bugs their CPU has before they pick it is a good one imo[1] > >Also an explosion of CONFIG_ items where they can be sanely derived >from others doesn't make much sense imo. > As I see it, kernel will only see a CONFIG_CPU_[3456]86 and a bunch of CONFIG_X86-{foof,ppro-fence,mmx, etc}. The others will only be used in CPUConfig.in to derive the visible ones. -- J.A. Magallon # Let the source be with you... mailto:jamagallon@able.es Mandrake Linux release 8.3 (Cooker) for i586 Linux werewolf 2.4.19-pre9-jam1 #1 SMP jue may 30 00:48:49 CEST 2002 i686