Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2011 18:45:53 +0100 From: Roman Divacky <rdivacky@FreeBSD.org> To: Jung-uk Kim <jkim@FreeBSD.org> Cc: svn-src-head@FreeBSD.org, svn-src-all@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, Maxim Dounin <mdounin@mdounin.ru> Subject: Re: svn commit: r219679 - head/sys/i386/include Message-ID: <20110316174553.GA6367@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <201103161233.16347.jkim@FreeBSD.org> References: <201103152145.p2FLjAlt060256@svn.freebsd.org> <20110316004503.GM99496@mdounin.ru> <201103161233.16347.jkim@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 12:32:56PM -0400, Jung-uk Kim wrote: > On Tuesday 15 March 2011 08:45 pm, Maxim Dounin wrote: > > This isn't really different as long as GENERIC kernel used, as > > GENERIC defines I486_CPU. > > Fixed in r219698, sorry. > > Actually, I think we should remove i486 from GENERIC at some point. > It has too many limitations. For example, I really love to implement > atomic 64-bit mem read/write using cmpxchg8b (no 0xf00f joke, please) > but I cannot do that cleanly without removing I486 support or > checking cpu_class at run-time. :-( if we drop i486 I think it makes sense to require something that has at least SSE2, thus we can have the same expectations as on amd64. and we can use sse2 unconditionally (str*, mem* etc.)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20110316174553.GA6367>