On Fri 2008-01-18 01:27:06, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Kyle McMartin wrote:
> >On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 06:53:53AM +0100, Andi Kleen
> >wrote:
> >>One problem that we had in the past is that some
> >>simulators
> >>only implement the absolutely minimum feature set and
> >>you
> >>might have well
On Fri 2008-01-18 01:27:06, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
Kyle McMartin wrote:
On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 06:53:53AM +0100, Andi Kleen
wrote:
One problem that we had in the past is that some
simulators
only implement the absolutely minimum feature set and
you
might have well broken one of these
On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 08:56:43AM -0500, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Andi Kleen wrote:
> >>Simulators can be fixed,
> >
> >They could, but why? I don't know of a good reason to require CLFLUSH.
>
> Well, simulators are generally expected to follow the architecture, not
> vice versa. I would tend
Andi Kleen wrote:
Simulators can be fixed,
They could, but why? I don't know of a good reason to require CLFLUSH.
Well, simulators are generally expected to follow the architecture, not
vice versa. I would tend to agree with the coupling that recent
versions of Bochs appeared to have made
Andi Kleen wrote:
Simulators can be fixed,
They could, but why? I don't know of a good reason to require CLFLUSH.
Well, simulators are generally expected to follow the architecture, not
vice versa. I would tend to agree with the coupling that recent
versions of Bochs appeared to have made
On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 08:56:43AM -0500, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
Andi Kleen wrote:
Simulators can be fixed,
They could, but why? I don't know of a good reason to require CLFLUSH.
Well, simulators are generally expected to follow the architecture, not
vice versa. I would tend to agree
> Simulators can be fixed,
They could, but why? I don't know of a good reason to require CLFLUSH.
> I just verified that Bochs 2.3.0 lacks this CPUID bit whereas the
> current version, 2.3.6, enables CLFLUSH iff SSE2 is enabled. Qemu 0.9.0
> has CLFLUSH. Andi, do you happen to know of any
Kyle McMartin wrote:
On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 06:53:53AM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote:
One problem that we had in the past is that some simulators
only implement the absolutely minimum feature set and you
might have well broken one of these with this.
Yeah, true. Please ignore the patch folks.
On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 06:53:53AM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote:
> One problem that we had in the past is that some simulators
> only implement the absolutely minimum feature set and you
> might have well broken one of these with this.
Yeah, true. Please ignore the patch folks.
cheers, Kyle
--
To
Kyle McMartin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hopefully nobody will be stupid enough to implement a cpu without
> it. Frankly, it seems safe enough given we already require SSE2.
>
> This means the compiler can optimise away "if (!cpu_has_clflush)"
> blocks.
The original required CPUID bit set for
Kyle McMartin wrote:
Hopefully nobody will be stupid enough to implement a cpu without
it. Frankly, it seems safe enough given we already require SSE2.
This means the compiler can optimise away "if (!cpu_has_clflush)"
blocks.
Signed-off-by: Kyle McMartin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
Hopefully nobody will be stupid enough to implement a cpu without
it. Frankly, it seems safe enough given we already require SSE2.
This means the compiler can optimise away "if (!cpu_has_clflush)"
blocks.
Signed-off-by: Kyle McMartin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
include/asm-x86/cpufeature_64.h |
Hopefully nobody will be stupid enough to implement a cpu without
it. Frankly, it seems safe enough given we already require SSE2.
This means the compiler can optimise away if (!cpu_has_clflush)
blocks.
Signed-off-by: Kyle McMartin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
include/asm-x86/cpufeature_64.h |
Kyle McMartin wrote:
Hopefully nobody will be stupid enough to implement a cpu without
it. Frankly, it seems safe enough given we already require SSE2.
This means the compiler can optimise away if (!cpu_has_clflush)
blocks.
Signed-off-by: Kyle McMartin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
Kyle McMartin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hopefully nobody will be stupid enough to implement a cpu without
it. Frankly, it seems safe enough given we already require SSE2.
This means the compiler can optimise away if (!cpu_has_clflush)
blocks.
The original required CPUID bit set for x86-64
On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 06:53:53AM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote:
One problem that we had in the past is that some simulators
only implement the absolutely minimum feature set and you
might have well broken one of these with this.
Yeah, true. Please ignore the patch folks.
cheers, Kyle
--
To
Kyle McMartin wrote:
On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 06:53:53AM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote:
One problem that we had in the past is that some simulators
only implement the absolutely minimum feature set and you
might have well broken one of these with this.
Yeah, true. Please ignore the patch folks.
Simulators can be fixed,
They could, but why? I don't know of a good reason to require CLFLUSH.
I just verified that Bochs 2.3.0 lacks this CPUID bit whereas the
current version, 2.3.6, enables CLFLUSH iff SSE2 is enabled. Qemu 0.9.0
has CLFLUSH. Andi, do you happen to know of any
18 matches
Mail list logo
