Date: Tue, 29 Jun 1999 08:47:51 +1000 (EST) From: John Birrell <jb@cimlogic.com.au> To: peter@netplex.com.au (Peter Wemm) Cc: dillon@apollo.backplane.com, alc@cs.rice.edu, tlambert@primenet.com, bakul@torrentnet.com, julian@whistle.com, freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: high-efficiency SMP locks - submission for review Message-ID: <199906282247.IAA10502@cimlogic.com.au> In-Reply-To: <19990628171823.3445882@overcee.netplex.com.au> from Peter Wemm at "Jun 29, 1999 1:18:23 am"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Peter Wemm wrote: > Ahh, right, silly me. I was thinking of the 8-byte version which is signified > by the CX8 bit in cpuid. > > The 386, I doubt has it. There have been a couple of suggestions for ending > the support for the 386 as it will simplify some ugly code for emulating > kernel-mode write faults etc, but it's never happened. Apparently the > 386 is common in some areas still. Some of us use the 386EX as an embedded processor in low power (~2W) memory based applications. Dropping support for 386 (UP) from FreeBSD would fork a new *BSD! -- John Birrell - jb@cimlogic.com.au; jb@freebsd.org http://www.cimlogic.com.au/ CIMlogic Pty Ltd, GPO Box 117A, Melbourne Vic 3001, Australia +61 418 353 137 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199906282247.IAA10502>