From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752321Ab0EGWTZ (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 May 2010 18:19:25 -0400 Received: from earthlight.etchedpixels.co.uk ([81.2.110.250]:34305 "EHLO www.etchedpixels.co.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751504Ab0EGWTX (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 May 2010 18:19:23 -0400 Date: Fri, 7 May 2010 23:24:48 +0100 From: Alan Cox To: "H. Peter Anvin" Cc: Arjan van de Ven , Jacob Pan , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Alek Du , Feng Tang , LKML , Jacob Pan , Linus Torvalds , Arjan van de Ven Subject: Re: RFD: Should we remove the HLT check? (was Re: [PATCH 1/8] x86: avoid check hlt if no timer interrupts) Message-ID: <20100507232448.343b5ebc@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> In-Reply-To: <4BE479EA.3080005@zytor.com> References: <1273254108-3234-1-git-send-email-jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com> <1273254108-3234-2-git-send-email-jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com> <4BE478C1.2060602@zytor.com> <4BE4791B.1060304@linux.intel.com> <4BE479EA.3080005@zytor.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.5 (GTK+ 2.18.9; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > I'd be cool skipping it for family 5 or newer. I'm just wondering if we > should kill it completely -- IIRC it was only a handful of 386/486 > systems which had problems, usually due to marginal power supplies which > couldn't handle the noise of a variable load (DOS not having any power > management would run at a reliable 100% load) -- that's not exactly the > type of systems which would have survived to modern day. Also SMM and hardware bugs on some platforms - Cyrix MediaGX 5510 for example where a hlt at the wrong moment during ATA transfers hung the box until power cycle. But all old old stuff. Alan