Re: P6 NOPs again: MPSC?

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Hugh Dickins
Date: Tuesday, March 11, 2008 - 7:00 am

On Tue, 11 Mar 2008, H. Peter Anvin wrote:

Okay, so if we're to exclude CPU_GENERIC and MK8, I think that
makes my original patch the right one: here it is with a signoff.


I've now noticed that the machine I call MPENTIUM4 for 32-bit kernels
is called MPSC for 64-bit kernels, and in that case it still doesn't
get the P6 NOPs it ought to.  hpa explains that MK8 should still be
excluded, so it's just a matter of including MPSC along with MPENTIUM4.

Signed-off-by: Hugh Dickins <hugh@veritas.com>

--- 2.6.25-rc5/arch/x86/Kconfig.cpu	2008-03-05 11:27:23.000000000 +0000
+++ linux/arch/x86/Kconfig.cpu	2008-03-10 18:48:10.000000000 +0000
@@ -388,7 +388,7 @@ config X86_OOSTORE
 #
 config X86_P6_NOP
 	def_bool y
-	depends on (X86_64 || !X86_GENERIC) && (M686 || MPENTIUMII || MPENTIUMIII || MPENTIUMM || MCORE2 || MPENTIUM4)
+	depends on (X86_64 || !X86_GENERIC) && (M686 || MPENTIUMII || MPENTIUMIII || MPENTIUMM || MCORE2 || MPENTIUM4 || MPSC)
 
 config X86_TSC
 	def_bool y


--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[PATCH] x86: a P4 is a P6 not an i486, Hugh Dickins, (Tue Mar 4, 12:33 pm)
Re: [PATCH] x86: a P4 is a P6 not an i486, Ingo Molnar, (Tue Mar 4, 2:01 pm)
Re: [PATCH] x86: a P4 is a P6 not an i486, H. Peter Anvin, (Tue Mar 4, 2:24 pm)
Re: [PATCH] x86: a P4 is a P6 not an i486, Ingo Molnar, (Tue Mar 4, 2:32 pm)
P6 NOPs again: MPSC?, Hugh Dickins, (Mon Mar 10, 12:14 pm)
Re: P6 NOPs again: MPSC?, H. Peter Anvin, (Mon Mar 10, 1:17 pm)
Re: P6 NOPs again: MPSC?, Hugh Dickins, (Mon Mar 10, 3:02 pm)
Re: P6 NOPs again: MPSC?, H. Peter Anvin, (Mon Mar 10, 11:43 pm)
Re: P6 NOPs again: MPSC?, Ingo Molnar, (Tue Mar 11, 2:28 am)
Re: P6 NOPs again: MPSC?, Hugh Dickins, (Tue Mar 11, 6:45 am)
Re: P6 NOPs again: MPSC?, Hugh Dickins, (Tue Mar 11, 7:00 am)