https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=439464
--- Comment #2 from Mingcong Bai <jeff...@aosc.io> --- (In reply to Harald Sitter from comment #1) > > On AArch64, as there is no such thing as a processor branding or "pretty > > name," > > what do you expect to happen then? hide the entry? Well, truthfully I don't have a straight answer to this (hence this bug report, but maybe I didn't write my report in the most... affirming way?). For AArch64, there's actually a way to generate a "pretty name," checking /proc/cpuinfo... CPU implementer : 0x41 CPU architecture: 8 CPU variant : 0x0 CPU part : 0xd08 CPU revision : 2 If we refer to "implementer" and "part," this translates into Cortex-A72 r0p2 (Implementer 0x41: ARM Ltd.; Part 0xd08: A72; ...). But then there are asymmetric (big.LITTLE) ARM SoCs with different cores for different performance characteristics, so this may not work in the end. There's also another way, I suppose. If we couldn't detect an exact processor model, would it be possible to simply display something like "16 × AArch64 Processors"? In Cinnamon, in case of undetected CPU model, it displays "unknown processor" as a fallback. Just to restate why I opened this report in the first place - KInfoCenter simply leaves the model part empty, leaving "16 ×" which simply seems like a bug. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
