From owner-freebsd-chat Sun Oct 1 13:47:27 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from relay2.inwind.it (relay2.inwind.it [212.141.53.73]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B12137B502 for ; Sun, 1 Oct 2000 13:47:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bartequi.ottodomain.org (62.98.154.71) by relay2.inwind.it (5.1.046) id 39CB09790015DF48; Sun, 1 Oct 2000 22:46:40 +0200 From: Salvo Bartolotta Date: Sun, 01 Oct 2000 21:47:25 GMT Message-ID: <20001001.21472500@bartequi.ottodomain.org> Subject: Re: Another 4.1-S panic (full report) To: Bill Fumerola Cc: BSD , "Jeffrey J. Mountin" , freebsd-chat@freebsd.org References: <4.3.2.20001001132645.00cae340@207.227.119.2> <20001001154131.Y38472@jade.chc-chimes.com> <20001001.20514000@bartequi.ottodomain.org> <20001001155807.Z38472@jade.chc-chimes.com> X-Mailer: SuperCalifragilis X-Priority: 3 (Normal) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org [ redirected to -chat ] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< On 10/1/00, 8:58:07 PM, Bill Fumerola wrote regarding Re: Another 4.1-S panic (full report): > On Sun, Oct 01, 2000 at 08:51:40PM +0000, Salvo Bartolotta wrote: > > LINT (cvsup'ed yesterday) states: > > > >
> > > > # NO_F00F_HACK disables the hack that prevents Pentiums (and ONLY > > # Pentiums) from locking up when a LOCK CMPXCHG8B instruction is > > # executed. This should be included for ALL kernels that won't run > > # on a Pentium. > > > >
> > > > Either the statement in LINT is not correct, or your statement is no= t > > correct. Tertium non datur :-) > > > > Seriously: if NO_F00F_HACK is only used in conjunction with pentiums= > > (I586_CPU), then LINT should be modified accordingly. > ./i386/identcpu.c:#if defined(I586_CPU) && !defined(NO_F00F_HACK) > ./i386/identcpu.c:#if defined(I586_CPU) && !defined(NO_F00F_HACK) > ./i386/machdep.c:#if defined(I586_CPU) && !defined(NO_F00F_HACK) > ./i386/machdep.c:#if defined(I586_CPU) && !defined(NO_F00F_HACK) > ./i386/machdep.c:#endif /* defined(I586_CPU) && !NO_F00F_HACK */ > ./i386/mp_machdep.c:#if defined(I586_CPU) && !defined(NO_F00F_HACK) > ./i386/trap.c:#if defined(I586_CPU) && !defined(NO_F00F_HACK) > ./i386/trap.c:#if defined(I586_CPU) && !defined(NO_F00F_HACK) > ./i386/trap.c:#if defined(I586_CPU) && !defined(NO_F00F_HACK) > ./i386/trap.c:#if defined(I586_CPU) && !defined(NO_F00F_HACK) > So, because the microphone evidently wasn't on the first time: > If you don't define I586_CPU, NO_F00F_HACK does nothing. I am afraid you missed my point. And I am afraid the reverse is true: I did pay attention. In the last sentence of my previous letter (see above), I suggested modifying LINT if it was incorrect. I did NOT state that you were certainly wrong. You have just shown that LINT IS incorrect. By the way, Jeffrey Mountin has actually just suggested a possible modification. I should have had a look at the code first; this is certainly my only fault *blushing like a primary school pupil not having done his/her homework* :-) Best regards, Salvo To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message