On Mon, 21 Jun 2010 11:48:33 +0200, Peter Stuge peter@stuge.se wrote:
Joseph Smith wrote:
Before I did not get the "Using generic cpu ops (good)" is that ok?
The message seems to suggest so..
Hmm, to me it suggests it is using a _fail_safe_ because it can't find the correct (0x068a) device. It works fine eithor way but I don't think the _fail_safe_ is supposed to be the "normal" method.
It says "generic" and "good" - not even "default" nor anything else that might suggest a failure to me. :)
As could be expected from the code, that message is printed after the CPU is known when disregarding stepping.
$ grep -rn 'Using generic cpu ops' .|grep -v '/.svn/' ./arch/i386/lib/cpu.c:253: printk(BIOS_DEBUG, "Using generic cpu ops (good)\n");
Ok, now lets look at the whole function:
/* Lookup the cpu's operations */ set_cpu_ops(cpu);
if(!cpu->ops) { /* mask out the stepping and try again */ cpu->device -= c.x86_mask; set_cpu_ops(cpu); cpu->device += c.x86_mask; if(!cpu->ops) die("Unknown cpu"); printk(BIOS_DEBUG, "Using generic cpu ops (good)\n"); }
Hmm, to me this is a _fail_safe_ or _fall_back_. cpu->ops fails because it is not able to find cpu->device so it runs this function to "try again".