Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 21 Nov 2000 19:38:46 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 21 Nov 2000 19:38:35 -0500 Received: from neon-gw.transmeta.com ([209.10.217.66]:38923 "EHLO neon-gw.transmeta.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 21 Nov 2000 19:38:24 -0500 To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: "H. Peter Anvin" Subject: Re: Linux 2.4.0test11-ac1 Date: 21 Nov 2000 16:07:52 -0800 Organization: Transmeta Corporation, Santa Clara CA Message-ID: <8vf2oo$338$1@cesium.transmeta.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Disclaimer: Not speaking for Transmeta in any way, shape, or form. Copyright: Copyright 2000 H. Peter Anvin - All Rights Reserved Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Followup to: By author: Alan Cox In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel > > > > making any assumptions about APIC availability on a processor. > > > > OK, but how does it handle the 82489DX? There are valid configurations > > using this kind of APIC, including Pentium P54C ones... > > These processors don't report the APIC on the cpuid ? If so then I guess > the fix is something like this > > if( cpuid says there is no local apic && vendor != intel) > > Intel stuff appears to always be happy poking in APIC space. I don't know > if this is related to the chip internals on the non APIC capable chips. > Nononono... the 82489DX is an *external* APIC, which should be usable on any Socket 5/7 CPU... -hpa -- at work, in private! "Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot." http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/puzzle.txt - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/