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 19:42:25 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 30 May 2002 19:42:24 -0400 Received: from ns.suse.de ([213.95.15.193]:27146 "EHLO Cantor.suse.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 30 May 2002 19:42:23 -0400 Date: Fri, 31 May 2002 01:42:24 +0200 From: Dave Jones To: Jeff Garzik Cc: "J.A. Magallon" , Lista Linux-Kernel Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86 cpu selection (first hack) Message-ID: <20020531014224.C9282@suse.de> Mail-Followup-To: Dave Jones , Jeff Garzik , "J.A. Magallon" , Lista Linux-Kernel In-Reply-To: <20020530225015.GA1829@werewolf.able.es> <3CF6B3AD.6010106@mandrakesoft.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 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. Dave. [1] fsck, I sound like Eric. -- | Dave Jones. http://www.codemonkey.org.uk | SuSE Labs