[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1457784289.2007.19.camel@nexus-software.ie>
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2016 12:04:49 +0000
From: Bryan O'Donoghue <pure.logic@...us-software.ie>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
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, 2016-03-11 at 23:03 +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> 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.
>
Busy with the dayjob :) so I haven't updated on Galileo since
4b696dcb1a55e40648ad0eec4af991c72f945a85 (Feb 28 or so)
but... we'll do a better job keep track of -next to catch this stuff
earlier
---
bod
Powered by blists - more mailing lists