[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20101209202008.GA24143@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2010 15:20:08 -0500
From: Don Zickus <dzickus@...hat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, gorcunov@...il.com
Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>,
Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Jason Wessel <jason.wessel@...driver.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Haren Myneni <hbabu@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: perf hw in kexeced kernel broken in tip
On Wed, Dec 08, 2010 at 03:59:16PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-12-08 at 15:20 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> > > I wonder if you should reverse these checks. If the bios has the perf
> > > counter enabled, there might be a high chance that it fails the first
> > > check and never gets to the actually bios checks.
> >
> > Ah, good point.
>
> Something like so..
Getting closer...
Pentium4s are special they need the double write, so...
> + /*
> + * Now write a value and read it back to see if it matches,
> + * this is needed to detect certain hardware emulators (qemu/kvm)
> + * that don't trap on the MSR access and always return 0s.
> + */
> val = 0xabcdUL;
> - ret |= checking_wrmsrl(x86_pmu.perfctr, val);
> + ret = checking_wrmsrl(x86_pmu.perfctr, val);
if (x86_pmu.perfctr_second_write)
ret |= checking_wrmsrl(x86_pmu.perfctr, val);
solved my p4 problems for kexec.
> ret |= rdmsrl_safe(x86_pmu.perfctr, &val_new);
> if (ret || val != val_new)
> - return false;
> + goto msr_fail;
>
> return true;
Cheers,
Don
--
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