Subject: Re: [Dri-devel] [2.6 patch] disallow DRM on 386
From: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To: Adrian Bunk <bunk@fs.tum.de>
Cc: DRI Devel <dri-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>,
       Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <20040121002827.GG6441@fs.tum.de>
References: <20040120212421.GF12027@fs.tum.de>
	 <1074643498.25861.14.camel@dhcp23.swansea.linux.org.uk>
	 <20040121002827.GG6441@fs.tum.de>
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <1074707769.25859.37.camel@dhcp23.swansea.linux.org.uk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 17:56:10 +0000
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 936
Lines: 24

On Mer, 2004-01-21 at 00:28, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > Fix system.h to always define cmpxchg.h and check its presence at
> > runtime when the DRM module loads, then you can build 386 kernels that
> > support DRI on higher machines.
> > 
> > The problem isnt that cmpxchg definitely doesn't exist, so system.h is
> > wrong IMHO
> 
> ???
> 
> AFAIR cmpxchg wasn't present in cpus earlier than the 486.

This is not relevant to the discussion assuming you are talking about
kernels for 386 and higher as well as kernels solely for Intel 386. If
the kernel is for 386 and higher then the DRI modules should be built
but should check for cmpxchg at run time - as we do with many other
CPU features


-
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/