Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2000 12:44:42 -0700 From: R Joseph Wright <rjoseph@mammalia.org> To: Dan Nelson <dnelson@emsphone.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Kernel option NO_F00F_HACK Message-ID: <20000720124442.A5854@manatee.mammalia.org> In-Reply-To: <20000720120731.B1377@dan.emsphone.com>; from dnelson@emsphone.com on Thu, Jul 20, 2000 at 12:07:31PM -0500 References: <397722AD.427D36AE@gmx.de> <20000720120731.B1377@dan.emsphone.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Jul 20, 2000 at 12:07:31PM -0500, Dan Nelson wrote:
> In the last episode (Jul 20), Siegbert Baude said:
> > Hi,
> > is this kernel option a workaround for a known Pentium bug (feature?
> > :-) )? If so did Intel remove this bug in newer chips? Or asked in a
> > different way: Is this option still necessary for all generations of
> > Pentiums from Pentium 60 to Pentium III 1 GHz?
>
> All 586-class chips from Intel suffer from the bug afaik. The pII and
> pIII aren't Pentiums for the purposes of the F00F test, they're
> 686-class CPUs. Blame Intel for their goofy naming scheme ("haha!
> we'll stop using numbers at all, and call everything Pentium from now
> on!")
That option has always been rejected by config whenever I have tried to use
it <shrug />.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000720124442.A5854>