Re: RFC: [2.6 patch] better i386 CPU selection

Adrian Bunk
2003-09-08T14:30:04Z

On Mon, Sep 08, 2003 at 10:46:30AM +1000, Rusty Russell wrote:
> In message <20030907112813.GQ14436@fs.tum.de> you write:
> > - @Rusty:
> > what's your opinion on making MODULE_PROC_FAMILY in
> > include/asm-i386/module.h some kind of bitmask?
>
> The current one is readable, which is good, and Linus asked for it,
> which makes it kinda moot. And really, if you compile a module with
> M686 and insert it in a kernel with M586, *WHATEVER* scheme you we use
> for CPU seleciton, I want the poor user to have to use "modprobe -f".

I agree, my thoughts go in the direction

bit 0 CPU_386
bit 1 CPU_486
bit 2 CPU_586
...

And you should need a "modprobe -f" if the bitmask in the module differs
from the bitmask in the kernel.

> Hope that clarifies,
> Rusty.

cu
Adrian

--

"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed