From owner-freebsd-stable Sat Aug 18 18:16:39 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mass.dis.org (mass.dis.org [216.240.45.41]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB46737B407; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 18:16:36 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from msmith@mass.dis.org) Received: from mass.dis.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mass.dis.org (8.11.4/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f7J1KpS03969; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 18:20:51 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from msmith@mass.dis.org) Message-Id: <200108190120.f7J1KpS03969@mass.dis.org> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.1.1 10/15/1999 To: Kenneth W Cochran Cc: Mike Smith , freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: New kernel option CPU_ENABLE_SSE In-reply-to: Your message of "Sat, 18 Aug 2001 18:47:34 EDT." <200108182247.SAA09198@world.std.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2001 18:20:51 -0700 From: Mike Smith Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > >> Because not all i686'es support SSE. > > > >So detect it automatically based on the CPU feature bits. > > > >Needing a kernel compile option for this is unforgivably lame. If you > >want to be able to disable it, use a tunable. > > Perhaps; the "gist" I get is that the compile option is for > some "field-testing." Maybe similarly appropriate would be > something similar to "NO_F00F_HACK"; for example, > "CPU_DISABLE_SSE" or "CPU_NO_ENABLE_SSE" (?). All of this stuff is unforgivably lame. Tunables. Tunables. Dammit. 8) -- ... every activity meets with opposition, everyone who acts has his rivals and unfortunately opponents also. But not because people want to be opponents, rather because the tasks and relationships force people to take different points of view. [Dr. Fritz Todt] V I C T O R Y N O T V E N G E A N C E To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message