[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: lock a pentium for fun!

George Bonser <grep@oriole.sbay.org> writes:
> If the instruction set is changed, the CPU part number should change. In other
> words, future extentions should be IMPOSSIBLE. Unused opcodes should execute a
> NOP or an instruction that causes the currently executing program to terminate
> in a known condition ... HALT? In this way, Pentium-N code running on a
> Pentium-(<N) processor does not cause harm.  When an instruction set is
> expanded, the processor part number should change.

Oh, yeah, duh.  I thought you meant that there should not be any
instructions that are not useful; i.e., every possible byte value
should have a defined purpose.  Now that you've explained, it makes
more sense.
Ben Pfaff <pfaffben@pilot.msu.edu> <blp@gnu.org> <pfaffben@debian.org>
Senders of unsolicited commercial e-mail will receive free 32MB core files!

TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-user-request@lists.debian.org . 
Trouble?  e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .

Reply to: