/freebsd/sys/amd64/amd64/ |
H A D | support.S | diff e44a0ea3114c5b4007d3b32d1ce7f5de983ef401 Tue Jan 16 10:10:34 CET 2001 Peter Wemm <peter@FreeBSD.org> Stop doing runtime checking on i386 cpus for cpu class. The cpu is slow enough as it is, without having to constantly check that it really is an i386 still. It was possible to compile out the conditionals for faster cpus by leaving out 'I386_CPU', but it was not possible to unconditionally compile for the i386. You got the runtime checking whether you wanted it or not. This makes I386_CPU mutually exclusive with the other cpu types, and tidies things up a little in the process.
Reviewed by: alfred, markm, phk, benno, jlemon, jhb, jake, grog, msmith, jasone, dcs, des (and a bunch more people who encouraged it) diff e44a0ea3114c5b4007d3b32d1ce7f5de983ef401 Tue Jan 16 10:10:34 CET 2001 Peter Wemm <peter@FreeBSD.org> Stop doing runtime checking on i386 cpus for cpu class. The cpu is slow enough as it is, without having to constantly check that it really is an i386 still. It was possible to compile out the conditionals for faster cpus by leaving out 'I386_CPU', but it was not possible to unconditionally compile for the i386. You got the runtime checking whether you wanted it or not. This makes I386_CPU mutually exclusive with the other cpu types, and tidies things up a little in the process.
Reviewed by: alfred, markm, phk, benno, jlemon, jhb, jake, grog, msmith, jasone, dcs, des (and a bunch more people who encouraged it)
|
H A D | machdep.c | diff e44a0ea3114c5b4007d3b32d1ce7f5de983ef401 Tue Jan 16 10:10:34 CET 2001 Peter Wemm <peter@FreeBSD.org> Stop doing runtime checking on i386 cpus for cpu class. The cpu is slow enough as it is, without having to constantly check that it really is an i386 still. It was possible to compile out the conditionals for faster cpus by leaving out 'I386_CPU', but it was not possible to unconditionally compile for the i386. You got the runtime checking whether you wanted it or not. This makes I386_CPU mutually exclusive with the other cpu types, and tidies things up a little in the process.
Reviewed by: alfred, markm, phk, benno, jlemon, jhb, jake, grog, msmith, jasone, dcs, des (and a bunch more people who encouraged it) diff e44a0ea3114c5b4007d3b32d1ce7f5de983ef401 Tue Jan 16 10:10:34 CET 2001 Peter Wemm <peter@FreeBSD.org> Stop doing runtime checking on i386 cpus for cpu class. The cpu is slow enough as it is, without having to constantly check that it really is an i386 still. It was possible to compile out the conditionals for faster cpus by leaving out 'I386_CPU', but it was not possible to unconditionally compile for the i386. You got the runtime checking whether you wanted it or not. This makes I386_CPU mutually exclusive with the other cpu types, and tidies things up a little in the process.
Reviewed by: alfred, markm, phk, benno, jlemon, jhb, jake, grog, msmith, jasone, dcs, des (and a bunch more people who encouraged it)
|
H A D | pmap.c | diff e44a0ea3114c5b4007d3b32d1ce7f5de983ef401 Tue Jan 16 10:10:34 CET 2001 Peter Wemm <peter@FreeBSD.org> Stop doing runtime checking on i386 cpus for cpu class. The cpu is slow enough as it is, without having to constantly check that it really is an i386 still. It was possible to compile out the conditionals for faster cpus by leaving out 'I386_CPU', but it was not possible to unconditionally compile for the i386. You got the runtime checking whether you wanted it or not. This makes I386_CPU mutually exclusive with the other cpu types, and tidies things up a little in the process.
Reviewed by: alfred, markm, phk, benno, jlemon, jhb, jake, grog, msmith, jasone, dcs, des (and a bunch more people who encouraged it) diff e44a0ea3114c5b4007d3b32d1ce7f5de983ef401 Tue Jan 16 10:10:34 CET 2001 Peter Wemm <peter@FreeBSD.org> Stop doing runtime checking on i386 cpus for cpu class. The cpu is slow enough as it is, without having to constantly check that it really is an i386 still. It was possible to compile out the conditionals for faster cpus by leaving out 'I386_CPU', but it was not possible to unconditionally compile for the i386. You got the runtime checking whether you wanted it or not. This makes I386_CPU mutually exclusive with the other cpu types, and tidies things up a little in the process.
Reviewed by: alfred, markm, phk, benno, jlemon, jhb, jake, grog, msmith, jasone, dcs, des (and a bunch more people who encouraged it)
|
/freebsd/sys/i386/i386/ |
H A D | pmap.c | diff e44a0ea3114c5b4007d3b32d1ce7f5de983ef401 Tue Jan 16 10:10:34 CET 2001 Peter Wemm <peter@FreeBSD.org> Stop doing runtime checking on i386 cpus for cpu class. The cpu is slow enough as it is, without having to constantly check that it really is an i386 still. It was possible to compile out the conditionals for faster cpus by leaving out 'I386_CPU', but it was not possible to unconditionally compile for the i386. You got the runtime checking whether you wanted it or not. This makes I386_CPU mutually exclusive with the other cpu types, and tidies things up a little in the process.
Reviewed by: alfred, markm, phk, benno, jlemon, jhb, jake, grog, msmith, jasone, dcs, des (and a bunch more people who encouraged it) diff e44a0ea3114c5b4007d3b32d1ce7f5de983ef401 Tue Jan 16 10:10:34 CET 2001 Peter Wemm <peter@FreeBSD.org> Stop doing runtime checking on i386 cpus for cpu class. The cpu is slow enough as it is, without having to constantly check that it really is an i386 still. It was possible to compile out the conditionals for faster cpus by leaving out 'I386_CPU', but it was not possible to unconditionally compile for the i386. You got the runtime checking whether you wanted it or not. This makes I386_CPU mutually exclusive with the other cpu types, and tidies things up a little in the process.
Reviewed by: alfred, markm, phk, benno, jlemon, jhb, jake, grog, msmith, jasone, dcs, des (and a bunch more people who encouraged it)
|
H A D | machdep.c | diff e44a0ea3114c5b4007d3b32d1ce7f5de983ef401 Tue Jan 16 10:10:34 CET 2001 Peter Wemm <peter@FreeBSD.org> Stop doing runtime checking on i386 cpus for cpu class. The cpu is slow enough as it is, without having to constantly check that it really is an i386 still. It was possible to compile out the conditionals for faster cpus by leaving out 'I386_CPU', but it was not possible to unconditionally compile for the i386. You got the runtime checking whether you wanted it or not. This makes I386_CPU mutually exclusive with the other cpu types, and tidies things up a little in the process.
Reviewed by: alfred, markm, phk, benno, jlemon, jhb, jake, grog, msmith, jasone, dcs, des (and a bunch more people who encouraged it) diff e44a0ea3114c5b4007d3b32d1ce7f5de983ef401 Tue Jan 16 10:10:34 CET 2001 Peter Wemm <peter@FreeBSD.org> Stop doing runtime checking on i386 cpus for cpu class. The cpu is slow enough as it is, without having to constantly check that it really is an i386 still. It was possible to compile out the conditionals for faster cpus by leaving out 'I386_CPU', but it was not possible to unconditionally compile for the i386. You got the runtime checking whether you wanted it or not. This makes I386_CPU mutually exclusive with the other cpu types, and tidies things up a little in the process.
Reviewed by: alfred, markm, phk, benno, jlemon, jhb, jake, grog, msmith, jasone, dcs, des (and a bunch more people who encouraged it)
|
/freebsd/sys/i386/conf/ |
H A D | NOTES | diff e44a0ea3114c5b4007d3b32d1ce7f5de983ef401 Tue Jan 16 10:10:34 CET 2001 Peter Wemm <peter@FreeBSD.org> Stop doing runtime checking on i386 cpus for cpu class. The cpu is slow enough as it is, without having to constantly check that it really is an i386 still. It was possible to compile out the conditionals for faster cpus by leaving out 'I386_CPU', but it was not possible to unconditionally compile for the i386. You got the runtime checking whether you wanted it or not. This makes I386_CPU mutually exclusive with the other cpu types, and tidies things up a little in the process.
Reviewed by: alfred, markm, phk, benno, jlemon, jhb, jake, grog, msmith, jasone, dcs, des (and a bunch more people who encouraged it) diff e44a0ea3114c5b4007d3b32d1ce7f5de983ef401 Tue Jan 16 10:10:34 CET 2001 Peter Wemm <peter@FreeBSD.org> Stop doing runtime checking on i386 cpus for cpu class. The cpu is slow enough as it is, without having to constantly check that it really is an i386 still. It was possible to compile out the conditionals for faster cpus by leaving out 'I386_CPU', but it was not possible to unconditionally compile for the i386. You got the runtime checking whether you wanted it or not. This makes I386_CPU mutually exclusive with the other cpu types, and tidies things up a little in the process.
Reviewed by: alfred, markm, phk, benno, jlemon, jhb, jake, grog, msmith, jasone, dcs, des (and a bunch more people who encouraged it)
|
/freebsd/sys/conf/ |
H A D | NOTES | diff e44a0ea3114c5b4007d3b32d1ce7f5de983ef401 Tue Jan 16 10:10:34 CET 2001 Peter Wemm <peter@FreeBSD.org> Stop doing runtime checking on i386 cpus for cpu class. The cpu is slow enough as it is, without having to constantly check that it really is an i386 still. It was possible to compile out the conditionals for faster cpus by leaving out 'I386_CPU', but it was not possible to unconditionally compile for the i386. You got the runtime checking whether you wanted it or not. This makes I386_CPU mutually exclusive with the other cpu types, and tidies things up a little in the process.
Reviewed by: alfred, markm, phk, benno, jlemon, jhb, jake, grog, msmith, jasone, dcs, des (and a bunch more people who encouraged it) diff e44a0ea3114c5b4007d3b32d1ce7f5de983ef401 Tue Jan 16 10:10:34 CET 2001 Peter Wemm <peter@FreeBSD.org> Stop doing runtime checking on i386 cpus for cpu class. The cpu is slow enough as it is, without having to constantly check that it really is an i386 still. It was possible to compile out the conditionals for faster cpus by leaving out 'I386_CPU', but it was not possible to unconditionally compile for the i386. You got the runtime checking whether you wanted it or not. This makes I386_CPU mutually exclusive with the other cpu types, and tidies things up a little in the process.
Reviewed by: alfred, markm, phk, benno, jlemon, jhb, jake, grog, msmith, jasone, dcs, des (and a bunch more people who encouraged it)
|