From owner-freebsd-stable Sun Oct 29 8: 4: 8 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from point.osg.gov.bc.ca (point.osg.gov.bc.ca [142.32.102.44]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91F3E37B479 for ; Sun, 29 Oct 2000 08:04:04 -0800 (PST) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by point.osg.gov.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.8) id IAA19534; Sun, 29 Oct 2000 08:03:02 -0800 Received: from passer.osg.gov.bc.ca(142.32.110.29) via SMTP by point.osg.gov.bc.ca, id smtpda19532; Sun Oct 29 08:02:53 2000 Received: (from uucp@localhost) by passer.osg.gov.bc.ca (8.11.0/8.9.1) id e9TG2r321412; Sun, 29 Oct 2000 08:02:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from cwsys9.cwsent.com(10.2.2.1), claiming to be "cwsys.cwsent.com" via SMTP by passer9.cwsent.com, id smtpdi21410; Sun Oct 29 08:02:05 2000 Received: (from uucp@localhost) by cwsys.cwsent.com (8.11.1/8.9.1) id e9TG25B01059; Sun, 29 Oct 2000 08:02:05 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <200010291602.e9TG25B01059@cwsys.cwsent.com> Received: from localhost.cwsent.com(127.0.0.1), claiming to be "cwsys" via SMTP by localhost.cwsent.com, id smtpdLt1047; Sun Oct 29 08:01:44 2000 X-Mailer: exmh version 2.2 06/23/2000 with nmh-1.0.4 Reply-To: Cy Schubert - ITSD Open Systems Group From: Cy Schubert - ITSD Open Systems Group X-OS: FreeBSD 4.1.1-RELEASE X-Sender: cy To: "O. Hartmann" Cc: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: F00F-HACK still necessary? In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 29 Oct 2000 15:13:01 +0100." Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 08:01:42 -0800 Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG In message , "O. Hartmann" writes: > Dear sirs. > As I read the changes received from CVSup today I realized the changes > in the explanation of the kernel oprion NO_F00F_HACK. We use an SMP system > with two 866EB Coppermines, so option is i686_CPU in the kernel. My question > is simple: do I still need to let NO_F00F_HACK undefined? For AMD CPUs we cou > ld > define this to remove the hack, do we sould remove it from i686 CPUs also? NO_F00F_HACK is only effective with the original Pentium. If you define i686_CPU, NO_F00F_HACK is implied. Regards, Phone: (250)387-8437 Cy Schubert Fax: (250)387-5766 Team Leader, Sun/DEC Team Internet: Cy.Schubert@osg.gov.bc.ca Open Systems Group, ITSD, ISTA Province of B To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message