From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon May 30 20:47:59 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79F3C1065674 for ; Mon, 30 May 2011 20:47:59 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from amvandemore@gmail.com) Received: from mail-fx0-f54.google.com (mail-fx0-f54.google.com [209.85.161.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0AF368FC0C for ; Mon, 30 May 2011 20:47:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: by fxm11 with SMTP id 11so3793452fxm.13 for ; Mon, 30 May 2011 13:47:58 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=D7pxbxOnwgJ+tyieFg8fn9sgHAVN3gHbj+g9hxyUV3A=; b=xN1TOMBM4gkaI1Na+WKf2vMiRigjOY49osWbb5p1zjzYm5dUrEBGasYKYlggGdQBpK dyi6YorrBDYHeFp1NFQBU9FT83AGwgmb23e6e0KilivwT/gnORKg/c6cYegUbhIfiuub ZXSOIhWY3zbRfLGDsaGoQpp0bhef/oWzUSa1o= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=kinX/MuBnPm+slqyaZGyNgdWXCmNO2+A5OAYImUtGnhVR19VthThbUr72j+nxeRONO xpKO6nvGazTe1SQT7vPf0Bv4ijSDhjFTu3cAy/tRih/rsMfNwpgzXRP5icFgxXfsfUda I+M/xt0R3aEw1fwe3DSw/RwnZAfyAphWIhqBs= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.223.21.215 with SMTP id k23mr1107053fab.88.1306788075454; Mon, 30 May 2011 13:41:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.223.118.148 with HTTP; Mon, 30 May 2011 13:41:15 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 30 May 2011 15:41:15 -0500 Message-ID: From: Adam Vande More To: Warren Block Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: I486_CPU or I586_CPU in kernel config X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 30 May 2011 20:47:59 -0000 On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 3:35 PM, Adam Vande More wrote: > On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 9:50 AM, Warren Block wrote: > >> Some time back, there was a post on one of the mailing lists that >> suggested it was better to leave either I486_CPU or I586_CPU enabled in a >> kernel config even for much newer processors. For performance reasons, >> AFAIR. Naturally I didn't save that post or a link to it. >> >> Can anyone find that message, or explain why it would be good to keep >> either of those cpu options in a kernel that will only run on much newer >> CPUs? >> > > Um, I don't recall seeing that and have removed them automatically for a > long time. Here is one that suggests keeping I586_CPU with results that > seem less than conclusive. > > http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable/2005-December/020702.html > Perhaps this is the one you meant? http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/2009-January/190568.html Actually the two threads touch on the same subject, and it seems removal of those options is still desirable on newer CPU's. -- Adam Vande More