It isnt worth the overhead. A 486 wants totally different memory alignment
before you even get into the differences in cache, write protect on
supervisor and instruction sets.
Once you hit 486DX or better then things pretty much fall into place (and
486SX or better is only the overhead of the FPU code - something that
could eventually be made discardable)
I'm also unconvinced SMP/Uniprocessor automated setup makes sense paticularly
as cheap multiprocessor boards frequently report two CPU's present even if
there are not.
> > No it shouldn't. You shouldn't be using APM with a SMP kernel.
> No APM with SMP hardware is OK. No APM with an SMP kernel is bad.
> (and even in the first case, power down ought to work)
And if you look at the kernel code you'll find an SMP kernel booted on
a single CPU box does use APM. Power down 'ought to work' ignores a lot
of design aspects of SMP motherboards (eg what happens if we halt the CPU
that gets SMI interrupts and try and power down on the other). More
productive would be for you to download the ACPI spec and get programming.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to email@example.com
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/