[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20071211191649.GB3437@elf.ucw.cz>
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2007 20:16:49 +0100
From: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To: Rene Herman <rene.herman@...access.nl>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
"linux-os (Dick Johnson)" <linux-os@...logic.com>,
David Newall <david@...idnewall.com>,
Paul Rolland <rol@...917.net>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Krzysztof Halasa <khc@...waw.pl>,
Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
"David P. Reed" <dpreed@...d.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, rol@...be.net
Subject: Re: RFC: outb 0x80 in inb_p, outb_p harmful on some modern AMD64
with MCP51 laptops
Hi!
>> Anyways it looks like the discussion here is going in a
>> a loop. I had hoped David would post his test results with
>> another port so that we know for sure that the bus aborts (and not port
>> 80) is the problem on his box. But it looks like
>> he doesn't want to do this. Still removing the bus aborts
>> is probably the correct way to go forward.
>
> Yes, I do also still want to know that. David (Reed)?
>
>> Only needs a patch now. If nobody beats me to it i'll
>> add one later to my tree.
>
> Pavel Machek already posted one. His udelay(8) wants to be less -- 1 or "to
> be safe" perhaps 2.
>
> http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/12/9/131
2 at least; that's how long outb(0x80) takes on one of my
machines. Actually, ISA can go down to 4MHz, so maybe we should be
using 4 usec.... but I guess I'm paranoid here.
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists