[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160311220313.GG4312@pd.tnic>
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2016 23:03:13 +0100
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Bryan O'Donoghue <pure.logic@...us-software.ie>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
"Yu, Yu-cheng" <yu-cheng.yu@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/FPU: Fix FPU handling on legacy FPU machines
On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 10:32:43AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Obvious Ack to the patch, along with a "how did this ever work
> before?" comment..
I had a sarcastic sentence in the commit message which I deleted later:
"Apparently no one had tried the kernel on a 486er after the FPU
rewrite. Backwards compatibility is overrated."
:-)
I'm still wondering, though, why didn't the Quark people scream
earlier... And who knows, it was probably b0rked even before the
FPU rewrite.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists