On May 30, 2011, at 4:53 PM, Warren Block wrote:
On Mon, 30 May 2011, Adam Vande More wrote:
Perhaps this is the one you meant?
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/2009-January/190568.html
That's the one! Thanks!
Actually the two threads touch on the same subject, and it
On Mon, 30 May 2011, Warren Block wrote:
On Mon, 30 May 2011, Adam Vande More wrote:
Perhaps this is the one you meant?
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/2009-January/190568.html
That's the one! Thanks!
Actually the two threads touch on the same subject, and it seems
Warren Block wrote:
On Mon, 30 May 2011, Adam Vande More wrote:
Perhaps this is the one you meant?
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/2009-January/190568.html
That's the one! Thanks!
Actually the two threads touch on the same subject, and it seems
removal of those
Some time back, there was a post on one of the mailing lists that
suggested it was better to leave either I486_CPU or I586_CPU enabled in
a kernel config even for much newer processors. For performance
reasons, AFAIR. Naturally I didn't save that post or a link to it.
Can anyone find that
On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 3:35 PM, Adam Vande More amvandem...@gmail.comwrote:
On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 9:50 AM, Warren Block wbl...@wonkity.com wrote:
Some time back, there was a post on one of the mailing lists that
suggested it was better to leave either I486_CPU or I586_CPU enabled in a
On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 9:50 AM, Warren Block wbl...@wonkity.com wrote:
Some time back, there was a post on one of the mailing lists that suggested
it was better to leave either I486_CPU or I586_CPU enabled in a kernel
config even for much newer processors. For performance reasons, AFAIR.
On Mon, 30 May 2011, Adam Vande More wrote:
Perhaps this is the one you meant?
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/2009-January/190568.html
That's the one! Thanks!
Actually the two threads touch on the same subject, and it seems
removal of those options is still desirable
On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 6:53 PM, Warren Block wbl...@wonkity.com wrote:
sys/i386/i386/support.s is mentioned, but doesn't seem to have anything
explicitly specific for 586. There are some i686 entries.
A test for cpu_class==CPUCLASS_586 in /sys/i386/isa/npx.c is mentioned in
the thread, but
