Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2004 16:50:28 +0000
From: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>
To: Rob Love <rml@ximian.com>
Cc: Mikael Pettersson <mikpe@csd.uu.se>, szepe@pinerecords.com, akpm@osdl.org,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Pentium M config option for 2.6
Message-ID: <20040104165028.GC31585@redhat.com>
Mail-Followup-To: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>, Rob Love <rml@ximian.com>,
	Mikael Pettersson <mikpe@csd.uu.se>, szepe@pinerecords.com,
	akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <200401041227.i04CReNI004912@harpo.it.uu.se> <1073228608.2717.39.camel@fur> <20040104162516.GB31585@redhat.com> <1073233988.5225.9.camel@fur>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1073233988.5225.9.camel@fur>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 951
Lines: 28

On Sun, Jan 04, 2004 at 11:33:08AM -0500, Rob Love wrote:

 > Yah.  I was just answering in the abstract to the "does cache line
 > matter on non-SMP" question.
 > 
 > I actually like this patch (perhaps since I have a P-M :) and think it
 > ought to go in, although I agree with others that the P-M is more of a
 > super-P3 than a scaled down P4.

FWIW, I agree with it too on the grounds that its non obvious the optimal
setting is CONFIG_MPENTIUMIII. This seems cleaner IMO than changing the
helptext to read...

 "Pentium II"
 "Pentium III / Pentium 4M"
 "Pentium 4"

My other mail may have sounded like I objected to the patch per se, I don't.

		Dave

-- 
 Dave Jones     http://www.codemonkey.org.uk
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/