Re: ar "zero" flag

[markucz%gmail.com@localhost]

> The biggest one is no support for cmpxchg. That means that i386 has to
> use a different mutex implementation than all the other CPUs and even
> then it normally has to done using either ras(9) or some other tricks.
> In the kernel it might even be possible to patch around that, but that
> doesn't help e.g. for rtld.
> 
> Other major issues are the lack of per-page TLB flushing and a number of
> specific bugs to workaround in the critical code path.


Alright, that's a good point. However, I believe there are 80386's used in
embedded devices, though I don't know whether they have CMPXCHG. It would be
a good thing if NetBSD supported them. Apart from that, well, I'll just stick
to some older version which still supports 80386. Now I feel sorry I don't
have the necessary skills to do something about it. *sigh*