> On Thu, 15 Oct 1998, Tom Sightler wrote:
> [...]
>> servers, etc. However, upon compiling 2.0.35 I've found that these machines
>> hang at Calibrating delay loop..., also, all the recent 2.1.xxx versions do
>> the same, as well as 2.0.36 pre13. There was a version of 2.1.xxx around
>> 110 that has temporarily disabled the enhanced chip detection and this
>> version did boot on these machines.
> Have you tried 2.1.116 or laters. There is an explicit test in the Cyrix
> code for both the presence of the DIR registers, and later for a 6x86
> class cpu before attempting any cpuid games (and all done in C). If this
> is not working I'll be very interested I finding out why, since the test
> procedures are the Cyrix Inc. recommended ones.
> On last thing, you *do* have SMP=1 commented out, right? This is *very*
> important.
SMP=1 commented out ? No multicasting with eepro100 ???? What a hell ? SUCH
RECOMENDATION IS NOT ACCEPTABLE for 2.2 kernel! Reason ? 2.2 kernel SHOULD
work for AT LEAST 99.9% peoples in precompiled binary-only version with all
needed capabilities !!!
It's Ok for development kernel to have comment "this feature will not work
with that other feature enabled" since
1. It's development kernel -- why you think it will work at all ?
2. Most users will compile development kernel for her own configuration.
For STABLE kernel situation when all NON-EXPERIMENTAL features are turned
on SHOULD produce kernel which will work for 99.9% peoples since this kernel
will be included in distributions and peoples SHOULD BE able to install
Linux "in full glory" WITHOUT kernel recompilation (I think that more then
half Linux users does not know how to recompile kernel just now and per cent
of such "dumb" users will grow in future). That's why modules was introduced
in 1.3 & 2.0 AFAIK. To avoid mess of 1.2.x-based distributions where was few
tens of different precompiled kernels :-(( 2.2 SHOULD NOT return that times!
Of course we could declare SMP and multicasting as experimental features but
what a gosh: SMP and multicasting are STILL EXPERIMENTAL ???? After few years
of development and great effort of Linus himself in SMP area ? Something is
REALLY wrong here. IMHO anyway.
P.S. The same is about APM stuff: APM stuff SHOULD work with SMP enabled on
when there are really only one processor installed. Unfortunatelly looks like
a 2.3 stuff -- to many places to change :-(( But when SMP-enabled kernel could
not even START on UP comp -- that's other story. This should be avoided for
AT LEAST 99.9% of computers.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/