Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 17:58:27 +0900 From: KATO Takenori <kato@eclogite.eps.nagoya-u.ac.jp> To: rb@gid.co.uk Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Cyrix DX2/4 Message-ID: <199704240858.RAA03485@gneiss.eps.nagoya-u.ac.jp> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 24 Apr 1997 08:31:02 %2B0100" References: <l03020904af84bc4a6892@[194.32.164.2]>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I don't forget PR/3292 :-), and I'm looking for information of Cyrix
486S/DX series CPUs.
> The root of this problem appears to be that Cyrix 486 DX DX2 and DX4 (and
> some equivalent TI-branded parts) are correctly identified, but are
> misclassified as CPU_486DLC where they should be just plain CPU_486. The
> following patch fixes the problem:
Cyrix/Ti/IBM 486DX2/DX4 have special registers (CCR1, CCR2, CCR3 and
SMAR), but they don't have CCR0 (from BIOS Writer's Guide). If
neither CYRIX_CACHE_WORKS nor CYRIX_CACHE_REALLY_WORKS is not set,
only CCR0 is modified. This operation should not have any effect on
DX2 / DX4 because they doesn't have CCR0. Did you get any problem
with initcpu.c revision 1.3?
If problem still remains, I would summit following idea:
init_486dlc()
{
u_long eflags;
u_char ccr0;
if ((cyrix_did & 0x00f0) == 0x00) {
/* 486 like CPU with 386 like bus. */
... /* same as revsion 1.3 */
} else {
/* 486 like CPU with 486 like bus. */
/* Should I support write-back cache? */
}
}
I consider that `CPU_486' means Intel's 486, which does not have any
special registers, and `CPU_486DLC' means Cyrix's 486, which has
special registers.
----
KATO Takenori <kato@eclogite.eps.nagoya-u.ac.jp>
Dept. Earth Planet. Sci., Nagoya Univ., Nagoya, 464-01, Japan
PGP public key: finger kato@eclogite.eps.nagoya-u.ac.jp
------------------- Powered by FreeBSD(98) -------------------
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199704240858.RAA03485>