linux-kernel - Re: [X86] Fix up silly i1586 boot message.

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 29 May 2008 11:35:08 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...ozas.de>
To:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
cc:	"Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@...ux-mips.org>,
	Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>,
	Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [X86] Fix up silly i1586 boot message.


On Thursday 2008-05-29 02:13, H. Peter Anvin wrote:

> Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
>> > uname reports i686 on these chips.  The rest is ridiculous.
>> 
>> Intel started it first with picking up a ridiculous number for the family
>> ID for the P4 line.  There is no technical justification for not keeping
>> these numbers consecutive.  Or keeping it at 6 actually if the P4 is meant
>> to be seen by software as the Pentium Pro and the rest of the P6 gang.
>
> Yes, this is what we eventually ended up doing as causing fewest compatibility
> problems.  For the message in question, it's better to be consistent with
> uname.

Then again, should not all of the i?86 names be collapsed,
much like there is only "sparc" and "sparc64" for
the actual sparcv7, sparcv8, sparcv9, sparcv9a pseudo-arches
used in, for example rpm, etc.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/