From owner-svn-src-all@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Mar 19 13:05:20 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-all@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8CF15106564A; Fri, 19 Mar 2010 13:05:20 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mj@feral.com) Received: from ns1.feral.com (ns1.feral.com [192.67.166.1]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 626F58FC1F; Fri, 19 Mar 2010 13:05:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.0.102] (m206-63.dsl.tsoft.com [198.144.206.63]) by ns1.feral.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o2JD5Jrs089152; Fri, 19 Mar 2010 05:05:19 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from mj@feral.com) Message-ID: <4BA376A0.1050101@feral.com> Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 06:05:36 -0700 From: Matthew Jacob User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.8) Gecko/20100227 Thunderbird/3.0.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Poul-Henning Kamp References: <18847.1269000643@critter.freebsd.dk> In-Reply-To: <18847.1269000643@critter.freebsd.dk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Default is to whitelist mail, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.3 (ns1.feral.com [192.67.166.1]); Fri, 19 Mar 2010 05:05:20 -0800 (PST) Cc: svn-src-head@FreeBSD.org, svn-src-all@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, Xin LI , John Baldwin Subject: Re: svn commit: r205307 - head/sys/i386/conf X-BeenThere: svn-src-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "SVN commit messages for the entire src tree \(except for " user" and " projects" \)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 13:05:20 -0000 On 3/19/2010 5:10 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > In message<201003190759.56385.jhb@freebsd.org>, John Baldwin writes: > >> On Thursday 18 March 2010 9:16:53 pm Xin LI wrote: >> > >> All the x86 world is not rack-mounted 64-bit servers. We should not remove >> support for non-686 CPUs for no good reason. 486 CPUs have cmpxchg and xadd >> so are perfectly adequate. >> > Seconded. > > I had thought that the SSE was unconditional. My mistake (and big mouth). I'll agree/