[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <50D25591.4030302@zytor.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 16:02:25 -0800
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Jacob Shin <jacob.shin@....com>,
Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...ux.intel.com>,
"Yu, Fenghua" <fenghua.yu@...el.com>,
"mingo@...nel.org" <mingo@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
Stefano Stabellini <Stefano.Stabellini@...citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [tip:x86/microcode] x86/microcode_intel_early.c: Early update
ucode on Intel's CPU
On 12/19/2012 03:40 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>
> This is done on the BSP, right? So we can measure it how long it takes
> by taking TSC values of start and end.
>
Yes, and we can count the number of #PF traps cheaply enough. It would
be interesting to put a counter on the number of #PFs and the number of
resets and read them out on a large-system boot.
>
> Sounds doable but we should take a hard look at the patches so that we
> don't miss anything.
>
> Also, I don't know how stuff like that would be approached for a wider
> testing - I mean, it is a serious change in x86 boot code and there will
> be issues.
>
The goal should be to have this into -tip and -next by the middle of
January in order to make the 3.9 merge window, I think.
-hpa
--
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf.
--
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