Arjan van de Ven wrote:
Zhang, Yanmin wrote:
If it's a single processor, the go backwards issue doesn't exist.
Below is
my patch based on Arjan's. It's against 2.6.19-rc5-mm2.
Hi,
this patch is incorrect
--- linux-2.6.19-rc5-mm2_arjan/arch/x86_64/kernel/setup.c
2006-11-29 10:41:21.000000000 +0800
+++ linux-2.6.19-rc5-mm2_arjan_fix/arch/x86_64/kernel/setup.c
2006-11-29 10:42:28.000000000 +0800
@@ -861,7 +861,7 @@ static void __cpuinit init_intel(struct
set_bit(X86_FEATURE_CONSTANT_TSC, &c->x86_capability);
if (c->x86 == 6)
set_bit(X86_FEATURE_REP_GOOD, &c->x86_capability);
- if (c->x86 == 15)
+ if (c->x86 == 15 && num_possible_cpus() != 1)
set_bit(X86_FEATURE_SYNC_RDTSC, &c->x86_capability);
first of all, you probably meant "|| num_possible_cpus() == 1"
but second of all, the core2 cpus are dual core so.. .what does it bring
you at all?
I guess you could boot with a UP kernel or maxcpus=1?
--
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
