Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> I didn't see much of this last sentence in the actual patch, which is
> good, because I just don't see any reason to do that at all; if they
> features are there anyway, why not preserve their detection, it's not
> hurting and it means you need to be less different "just because"...
>
mach-xen/head.S is simpler than kernel/head.S, partly because it doesn't
contain the CPU identification and feature tests (cpuid is assumed,
though ironically, we don't actually use it).
J
