On Sat, 2008-03-05 at 22:17 +0100, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:

quoted text
>  True, but people do make mistakes from time to time. :)  If I had a
> choice between a piece of silicon and a piece of documentation to trust, I
> would choose the former.
> 
>  Obviously this specific case has turned out to be an issue with Qemu, so
> it is somewhat irrelevant and given how the opcodes were added to the
> architecture I would consider the emulator excused.

Sorry folks - had to run some errands. Wow, thanks for all the
responses.

Yes, the posting i just did (as pointed in my first email) was on
qemu (so was the /proc/cpuinfo). I moved to qemu because it was less
painful to do the git bisecting on my laptop; i used the same .config.
I should also note that qemu seems to have worked fine in the past.
In any case I will try to rerun on the older hardware which i can access
next week again. I am begining to doubt myself if it is the same issue;
i know even there it was pointing to FPU.
So is the correct fix then to go patch qemu then? I should point i am
running a slightly older version of qemu that has a few patches (nothing
to do with x86 emulation).

hpa, results from running on qemu (not the hardware) are:
-----
mambo:~# ./hpa
Test 0: ok
Test 1: ok
Test 2: ok
Test 3: err
Test 4: err
Test 5: err
Test 6: err
Test 7: err
Test 8: err
----------------

cheers,
jamal

--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/