From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755264AbXLKTgc (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Dec 2007 14:36:32 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751911AbXLKTgZ (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Dec 2007 14:36:25 -0500 Received: from gprs189-60.eurotel.cz ([160.218.189.60]:34681 "EHLO amd.ucw.cz" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751332AbXLKTgY (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Dec 2007 14:36:24 -0500 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2007 20:36:54 +0100 From: Pavel Machek To: "David P. Reed" Cc: Alan Cox , Rene Herman , Paul Rolland , David Newall , "H. Peter Anvin" , Krzysztof Halasa , Andi Kleen , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , rol@witbe.net Subject: Re: RFC: outb 0x80 in inb_p, outb_p harmful on some modern AMD64 with MCP51 laptops Message-ID: <20071211193654.GE3437@elf.ucw.cz> References: <475E7DC2.4060509@davidnewall.com> <475E8D91.20201@keyaccess.nl> <20071211143224.15900995@tux.DEF.witbe.net> <475E9B9B.2050709@keyaccess.nl> <475EACB8.7080608@keyaccess.nl> <20071211163706.2dc82275@tux.DEF.witbe.net> <475EB263.2050405@keyaccess.nl> <475EC1C0.2040000@reed.com> <20071211173231.2b87a81f@the-village.bc.nu> <475EE2CA.6020601@reed.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <475EE2CA.6020601@reed.com> X-Warning: Reading this can be dangerous to your mental health. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-11) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi! > a spec sheet, or even better a machine. I may have an original PC-XT > still lying around in the attic, don't know if I can fire it up, but it had > such graphics cards. I also have several early high-speed clones that were > "overclocked". PC-XT does not count ... it needs to be 386 capable to count... Hmm.. but we have ucLinux now, so maybe PC-XT does count. >> Which requires care. Have you verified all the main chipset vendors ? >> >> > I obviously have not. Clearly the guys who want this port 80 hack so > desperately have not either. That's why we are in this pickle. Noone _wants_ this port 0x80 hack. We already have it, had it for 10+ years, and now we are trying to get rid of it -- _safely_. Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html