linux-kernel - Re: ACPI on Averatec 2370

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 8 Aug 2007 02:06:31 +0200
From:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To:	Cal Peake <cp@...olutedigital.net>
Cc:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Chuck Ebbert <cebbert@...hat.com>,
	Gabriel C <nix.or.die@...glemail.com>,
	Frank Hale <frankhale@...il.com>,
	Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Kernel ACPI Mailing List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
	len.brown@...el.com, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Subject: Re: ACPI on Averatec 2370

On Tue, Aug 07, 2007 at 06:15:37PM -0400, Cal Peake wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Aug 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 
> > > MSR_K8_ENABLE_C1E lo == 0x04c14015
> > > MSR_K8_ENABLE_C1E hi == 0x00000000
> > > lo & ENABLE_C1E_MASK == 0
> > 
> > And yeah, that claims that C1E is not on, but:
> > 
> > > amd_apic_timer_broken: forcing return value of 1
> 
> So it seems my initial debugging report was, err, incomplete. I failed to 
> notice that the amd_apic_timer_broken function was getting called twice, 
> once for each core.
> 
> The second call shows this:
> 
>   MSR_K8_ENABLE_C1E == 0x14c14015

Ah interesting. Ok finally that all starts making sense.

Not sure why the MSR varies between cores though.

> which causes our ENABLE_C1E_MASK check to be true and thus properly 
> return 1 from the function. So when we call the above function from 
> init_amd we prolly need to do a
> 
>   set_bit(X86_FEATURE_LAPIC_TIMER_BROKEN, c->x86_capability);
> 
> for each core if any of them happen to return true upon checking for a 
> broken timer.

It's better to just make it a global instead.

-Andi
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/