[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4C40DD11.4020803@zytor.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2010 15:28:33 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <borislav.petkov@....com>
CC: Michal Schmidt <mschmidt@...hat.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"Herrmann3, Andreas" <Andreas.Herrmann3@....com>,
Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@...el.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86: fix keeping track of AMD C1E
On 07/16/2010 09:25 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>
> I don't see the need for two things denoting C1E for the very simple
> reason: when C1E gets enabled on a machine, one of the bits gets set in
> the MSR on each core simultaneously. So if one core sees one of the bits
> set, all the remaining cores are seeing them too. The first core that
> sees one of the bits in the MSR, sets c1e_detected.
>
> So next time any core does cpu_idle() => c1e_idle(), it switches to
> timer broadcast on it since it might go into C1E if all the others
> follow.
>
> Frankly, I can't think of a case where we'd need to two things - I
> could be missing something. But this workaround is a couple of years
> old, maybe Thomas might give us more insight into whether there's a
> particular reason for the cpuid flag and the c1e_detected variable.
> Thomas?
>
I'm not saying there should be two things (and that's clearly wrong no
matter what), but rather it's not clear to me that the one thing should
be a variable.
-hpa
--
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