[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4AF9D8E2.7050205@zytor.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 13:19:30 -0800
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
CC: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>,
Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
Matteo Croce <technoboy85@...il.com>,
Sven-Haegar Koch <haegar@...net.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: i686 quirk for AMD Geode
On 11/10/2009 01:12 PM, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> yes, just like with emulated FPU or trapped unaligned accesses. It's
> just like flying fishes. They exist but they aren't the most common
> ones. If people encounter these cases on a specific program, then
> they just have to recompile it if it is a problem. At least they
> don't rebuild the whole distro. And once again, I've been using
> cmpxchg/bswap emulation for years on my i386 without feeling any
> need for a rebuild, and CMOV emulation for years now on my mini-itx
> C3 without any problem either. These are real experiences, not just
> fears of imaginary problems. Yes I can design a program to run 400
> times slower on these machines if I want. I just don't feel the need
> to do so and apparently existing programs' authors didn't either.
Willy, perhaps you can come up with a list of features you think should
be emulated, together with an explanation of why you opted for that list
of features and *did not* opt for others.
Note: emulated FPU is a special subcase. The FPU operations are
heavyweight enough that the overhead of trapping versus library calls is
relatively insignificant.
-hpa
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists