Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 08:30:02 -0700 (PDT) From: Andrew Gallatin <gallatin@cs.duke.edu> To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: i386/7201: (cpu == CPU_686) in pmap.c shoud also apply to CPU_PII, pmap_setdevram() disabled in wrong place Message-ID: <199807091530.IAA26595@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The following reply was made to PR i386/7201; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Andrew Gallatin <gallatin@cs.duke.edu> To: smoergrd@oslo.geco-prakla.slb.com (Dag-Erling Coidan Smørgrav) Cc: freebsd-gnats-submit@freebsd.org Subject: Re: i386/7201: (cpu == CPU_686) in pmap.c shoud also apply to CPU_PII, pmap_setdevram() disabled in wrong place Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 11:25:28 -0400 (EDT) Dag-Erling Coidan Smørgrav writes: > gallatin@cs.duke.edu writes: > > o Many Pentium Pro class features in pmap.c are enabled if cpu == CPU_686. > > With the recent addition of the CPU_PII, the CPU_PII cpu needs to be > > added to those tests. > > Hmm, I should have checked this when I introduced the code to identify > PII processors, so color me guilty. But as Poul-Henning remarked, > these tests should check the CPU class and not the CPU model, so your > fix is inadequate (or perhaps I should rather say that it is only a > short-term fix - until the next 686-class CPU hits the market) > > I'll try to set aside some time to look into this. Thank you very much > for pointing it out to us. > > DES (bad DES, baaaad DES) > -- > Dag-Erling Smørgrav - smoergrd@oslo.geco-prakla.slb.com I'd considered that myself, but I don't know anything about the Cyrix 6x86MX, which is identified as a CPUCLASS_686 cpu in identcpu.c. I was concerned that the P.Pro/PII optimizations in pmap.c might not apply to the Cyrix chip... Its a lot cleaner if they do. Drew To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-bugs" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199807091530.IAA26595>