linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86: enable CPUID on Cyrix cpus with CPUID disabled

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	30 Sep 2008 15:06:06 +0200
From:	krzysztof.h1@...zta.fm
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Krzysztof Helt <krzysztof.h1@...zta.fm>
Cc:	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"sfr@...b.auug.org.au" <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@...il.com>,
	Samuel Sieb <samuel@...b.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: enable CPUID on Cyrix cpus with CPUID disabled

> 
> * Krzysztof Helt <krzysztof.h1@...zta.fm> wrote:
> 
> > From: Krzysztof Helt <krzysztof.h1@...pl>
> > 
> > The macros setCx86_old() and getCx86_old() do not
> > work as a comment says in the processor-cyrix.h.
> > 
> > Use working inline functions instead to enable
> > the CPUID instriction on Cyrix cpus. 
> > 
> > Tested on IBM 6x86MX cpu with disabled the
> > CPUID instruction.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Helt <krzysztof.h1@...pl>
> > ---
> > 
> > This patch is against the linux-next tree (20080819)
> > as it contains the following patch:
> > 
> > x86, cyrix: debug
> > Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
> > 
> >
> http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/sfr/linux-next.git;a=commit;h=026e2c05ef58ef413e2d52696f125d5ea1aa8bce
> > 
> > The linux-2.6-tip tree has not the Ingo's patch so it 
> > does not require my patch.
> > 
> > I am confused. Is the x86 detection code for Cyrix
> > cpus is right in the linux-next or in the linux-2.6-tip?
> > Should I prepare patches against the linux-2.6-tip
> > or linux-next?
> 
> now that the bug is correctly understood and fixed, could you please 
> send a patch that cleans it all up and gets rid of the setCx86_old() / 
> setCx86() API distinction? I.e. revert commit 026e2c0 ("x86, cyrix: 
> debug"). Against tip/master please.
> 
> note that this was all done in connection to:
> 
>  commit c6744955d0ec0cb485c28c51eeb7185e260f6172
>  Author: Samuel Sieb <samuel@...b.net>
>  Date:   Wed Aug 6 22:06:29 2008 -0700
> 
>     x86: fix "kernel won't boot on a Cyrix MediaGXm (Geode)"
> 

I know that it was connected with the Geode booting, but I read the cyrix.c file and most paths are Geode specific and I won't be able to test them. I tested that reverting the commit 026e2c0 ("x86, cyrix: debug") does not break anything on 6x86MX cpu.

If the tip/master is a correct tree, please revert the commit 026e2c0 in the linux-next and drop this patch. This way everything is correct.

Regards,
Krzysztof

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Dzwon taniej na zagraniczne komorki!
Sprawdz >> http://link.interia.pl/f1f26 

--
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/