On Mon, Jun 27, 2005 at 01:45:39PM +0100, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote: > Anyway these days we apparently ignore the result of the S-cache probe > and the sc_present variable. The only values that determine whether an > S-cache is present or not are: cpu_has_dc_aliases, cpu_has_ic_fills_f_dc > and cpu_has_subset_pcaches which you need to get right for your > configuration -- I guess cpu_has_dc_aliases == 0, cpu_has_ic_fills_f_dc == > 1 and cpu_has_subset_pcaches == 0 should be right to fulfil your needs > (but it may break elsewhere). Have I heard: "serious brain damage" from > you? Well, I couldn't agree more... What matters isn't the presence of a second level cache but the actual properties. The old code was relying almost exclusively on the precense of an S-cache, so had to be very liberal in it's assumption about that cache's properties. Performancewise that sucked, badly. Ralf
