Re: Kernel cpu selection

david parsons (o.r.c@p.e.l.l.p.o.r.t.l.a.n.d.o.r.u.s)
19 Jul 1997 00:29:40 -0700

In article <linux.kernel.Pine.LNX.3.91.970718152603.26810F-100000@sigil.csc.com>,
Teunis Peters <teunis@usa.net> wrote:
>On Fri, 18 Jul 1997, Mike Jagdis wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 17 Jul 1997, Aaron Tiensivu wrote:
>>
>> > Coming up in the kernel, I think the whole chip definition section should
>> > be overhauled into some type of sassy multi-selection deal.
>>
>> This is excessive. You don't need this level of detail and putting
>> processor options into config rather than looking at the processor
>> type at run time makes portable kernel images tricky. Anyway my
>> non-Intel patch does something along these lines.
>
>I think this kind of detail is _GOOD_!
>(priorities in terms of importance to _ME_ :)

Well, it's bad in that it tosses more knowledge about the processor
into the build stage; if you're building general purpose kernels
(like a distribution, or for a network appliance like WebShield)
it means that the code taking advantage of the features of the
processor will be left off the kernel.

(And if you have code that will determine at runtime what sort
of processor is in the machine, it can then be tested on all
sorts of machines by a really large population of beta testers.)

____
david parsons \bi/ I should really look at the Cyrix patch for webshield
\/ again.