Re: Bug on 2.6.26 - x86 VIA Nehemiah CentaurHauls processor cannot boot

[Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org>]

H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Jeff Garzik wrote:
>>
>>> We're only referring specifically to the family == 6 VIA processors 
>>> here.
>>
>> To be specific, I was merely saying that VIA processors where 
>> c->x86_model==6 may lack CMOV.
>>
>> I have not kept track of what current Kconfig options will set, but in 
>> the past it was quite easy to build a "generic 686 kernel" that 
>> required CMOV and thus excluded these VIA processors.
>>
>> Distros in the past often wound up intentionally -not- supporting some 
>> of these VIA processors, because they did not want to create a 
>> non-CMOV kernel.  (This policy obviously excluded older x86 as well)
>>
>> If these things have been addressed recently (< 12-18 months) then all 
>> good.
>>
> 
> I am pretty sure CONFIG_X86_GENERIC doesn't disable CMOV, and since CMOV 
> is a separate CPUID flag it's all good (if the chip doesn't have it, 
> it'll trap.)

It's generally more an issue of making sure the compiler is not 
instructed to issue cmov (-march=i686).


> Unfortunately Intel didn't assign a CPUID flag for the long NOPs, and 
> then didn't document them (I think partially because they were a 
> retcon), but yet it reflected a serious hole in Centaur's 
> characterization effort that they bumped family to 6 without following 
> P6 behaviour for a massive range of opcodes.
> 
> The main reason for disabling P6 NOPs for CONFIG_X86_GENERIC is that the 
> win is so small, and that a number of vendors got it wrong.

Yeah.

	Jeff