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, 13 Mar 2003 17:39:04 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 13 Mar 2003 17:39:04 -0500 Received: from nat-pool-rdu.redhat.com ([66.187.233.200]:9339 "EHLO devserv.devel.redhat.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 13 Mar 2003 17:39:03 -0500 From: Alan Cox Message-Id: <200303132249.h2DMnj912399@devserv.devel.redhat.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpu/hw_random cleanups To: hpa@zytor.com (H. Peter Anvin) Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 17:49:45 -0500 (EST) Cc: jgarzik@pobox.com (Jeff Garzik), linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, davej@suse.de, alan@redhat.com, torvalds@transmeta.com In-Reply-To: <3E70E4B8.2010600@zytor.com> from "H. Peter Anvin" at Mar 13, 2003 12:06:16 PM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL6] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > > For example, I wonder if storing Intel's cpuid(0x00000001) ecx > > register output is wise on older Intel cpus. I worry about garbage > > appearing there. Is that a false worry? > > > > Yes; it should be completely safe. I have to admit I'd be more comfortable if we only set those bits IFF we know they are valid to check, not so much because we need to right now but out of a desire to make less mistakes possible