"Martin.Knoblauch" wrote:
>
> After some checking, I could have made the answer a bit less terse:
>
> - it would require that the kernel is compiled with cpuid [module]
> support
> - not everybody may want enable this, just for getting one or two
> harmless numbers.
If so, then that's their problem. We're not here to solve the problem of
stupid system administrators.
> - you would need a utility with root permission to analyze the cpuid
> info. The
> cahce info does not seem to be there in clear ascii.
Bullsh*t. /dev/cpu/%d/cpuid is supposed to be mode 444 (world readable.)
> - this limits my script to root users, or you need the setuid-bit on
> the
> utility. Not really good for security.
See above.
> - the cpuid stuff is i386 specific [today]. So are my changes. But
> implementing
> them for other architectures [if there is interest in the info] would
> not
> require to also implement the cpuid on other architectures. Which may
> not make any
> sense at all.
>
> So, having the numbers in clear text in the cpuinfo file looks simpler
> and safer to me, although reading /dev/cpu/*/cpuinfo maybe more
> versatile [on i386] - at some cost.
>
> Question: are there any utilities or other uses for the cpuid device
> today? Just interested. The kernel seems to work well without it.
That is usually the case with devices -- the kernel doesn't care, why
would it?
-hpa
--
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> at work, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> in private!
"Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot."
http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/puzzle.txt
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
